Pyreaux

It is often interpreted by members in two primary ways: spiritual treasure of "people" via missionary work and temporal treasure which fulfillment is "in due time", with the latter not being tied directly to building millennial temples or the New Jerusalem in Missouri in common commentary. Why Spiritual Treasure is the dominant interpretation of the "treasure" in this section, is that the people of Salem are the greater treasure, "there are more treasures than one," (D&C 111:9-10). D&C 111:2 states, "I have much treasure in this city for you, for the benefit of Zion, and many people in this city, whom I will gather out in due time for the benefit of Zion." This promise of many people was later fulfilled through missionary efforts, notably by Elder Erastus Snow in the 1840s, leading to a significant number of converts who went on to benefit the Church's efforts, or "Zion." The reference to "gold and silver" in verse 4 could be seen as a dramatic literary device to redirect their attention from literal money to eternal souls. However, the reference to "wealth pertaining to gold and silver shall be yours" (verse 4) suggests a literal, temporal blessing of wealth. But since this wealth was not obtained during Joseph Smith's 1836 visit, commentary generally views this as a promise yet to be fulfilled "in due time," through whatever means the Lord chooses to employ for the benefit of Zion, rather than a specific undiscovered cache of gold. There is no prominent or official LDS commentary that specifically connects the eventual wealth from Salem mentioned in D&C 111:4 to the funding of Millennial temples or the building of the New Jerusalem (Zion) in Missouri. While the building of the New Jerusalem and its temple is the ultimate goal of Zion, the immediate concern of the leaders was their current debt, partly from building the Kirtland Temple, and the gathering of people (converts) for the Church's establishment. The Twelve's "Sins" Concerning whether the Twelve Apostles "sins" and rebellion in D&C 112 in July 1837, nearly a year later, was known in foreknowledge and is the reason the wealth in Salem was concealed, is not a standard interpretation found in LDS commentary. D&C 111:1 already explicitly addresses the current "follies" of Joseph Smith and his companions already traveling to Salem from rumors of hidden treasure and seemingly mercifully does not withhold such a blessing, though perhaps redirects their focus to greater treasures. The promise in D&C 111:4 does not seem conditional on the future behavior of the Twelve. Lord does say he will "order all things for your good, and for the preservation of my people, if ye are faithful and wise as serpents, and yet without sin" (D&C 111:11), making the fulfillment of the promises conditional on the faithfulness of the leaders, but primarily on the Lord's timing and purposes for Zion. The Lord's message in D&C 111 is one of mercy and redirection: He accepts their misguided attempts to solve their financial problems and assures them that the greatest treasure is the gathering of souls, a work that will ultimately ensure their financial deliverance (D&C 111:5, 10).

Each other or even yourself. I'm fairly certain temptation is not the sole providence of your devils, and it is not assumed the devil has a devil. Joseph Smith from January 19, 1841, as recorded in the McIntire Minute Book, infers a spirit is an inferior state of being, with limitations inherent in spirit beings, how in the pre-mortal state we were "subject to oppression" from the powers of darkness (Ehat & Cook, Words, McIntire Minute Book: 19 January 1841 (Tuesday), p. 62.) so even in the premortal world, opposition and temptation existed. The power to resist and choose remained, but in order for us to ultimately overcome evil, it was necessary for us to acquire a physical body which could later be resurrected into an immortal one. While I don't have a full text of that specific minute immediately available, but he does say in other places how spirits lack the power and protection of a physical body. In 1843: "All beings who have bodies have more power than those who have not. The devil has no body, and herein is his great limitation." (Discourse, 5 January 1841, as Reported by William Clayton). Latter-day Saints believing in the necessity of a physical body and the purpose of mortality. Having a body gives individuals a greater capacity to resist evil and exercise their agency. Brigham Young taught, "The spirit that the Lord puts into a tabernacle of flesh, is under the dictation of the Lord Almighty; but the spirit and body are united in order that the spirit may have a tabernacle, and be exalted; and the spirit is influenced by the body, and the body by the spirit." He noted that the Devil "does not hold any power over man, only so far as the body overcomes the spirit that is in a man, through yielding to the spirit of evil." This implies that the body acts as a defense for the spirit. However, if the spirit yields to the body's fallen nature ("of the earth"), then the Devil can gain influence over both. In LDS theology, temptation and evil come from not just the temptations of physical lusts of the natural body, but your own weaknesses and the devil's power of persuasion, convincing others to reject the Father and his plan. An evil spirit's power to oppress a spirit without a body is largely the power to whisper doubt and prideful alternatives. The oppression an evil spirit inflicts can be mental anguish, fear, or a sense of hopelessness, all of which are spiritual rather than physical sensations. From the spirit world, an evil spirit can teach a man that he "must not pray" (2 Nephi 32:8) or invite and entice him to do evil (Moroni 7:12). These are attacks on the spirit's spiritual core.

That explains why the theology seems different. So, my question is twofold: Is to proceed to insert the later doctrine of pre-mortality into Moses 7 purely anachronistic? Or is it fair to suggest the passage was intentionally worded to be ambiguous or contains layers, such that it could be read in retrospect as a reference to the War in Heaven/pre-mortal life, even if strictly it wasn't the meaning at the time? When do we avoid sin of reading later ideas back into earlier texts, and when is it okay to place progressive revelation in a living scripture?

The knowledge given to Enoch's brethren is to "all mankind" in the day they were "created" is understood to be the gospel knowledge and instruction they received as spirits in the presence of God during their premortal life. Being taught the Father's plan of salvation, the role of Jesus Christ as the Savior, and principles of righteousness. The ongoing choice the next verse (Moses 7:33) specifies; "that they should love one another, and that they should choose me, their Father." Though everyone forgets what was taught, the "Light of Christ" everyone is born with will cause us to remember. The Lord is expressing sorrow in the passage is because they have strayed from this knowledge and are "without affection." Light of Christ is the spiritual endowment or intelligence given to all spirits, allows them to discern between good and evil. "In the day I created them" refers to the creation of their spirits in the premortal life as the spirit children of God the Father. The phrase "they are the workmanship of mine own hands" is understood as God being the Father of their spirits. This spirit creation is separate from the creation of Adam and Eve's physical bodies or the birth of mortal children. The LDS see Day One as a long creative day. Agency was an essential part of God's plan for His children's progression from the very beginning. The concept of the "War in Heaven" stems from this agency. Lucifer (Satan) sought to destroy the agency of man, proposing a plan that would have forced obedience. When his plan was rejected and the Father's plan (championed by Jesus Christ, which preserved agency) was chosen, one-third of the hosts of heaven exercised their agency to follow Lucifer and were cast out. Those who accepted the Father's plan, includes choosing to come to earth to gain a body and be tested were the ones permitted to be born into mortality.

From reporting, Religion News Service and Salt Lake Tribune are noticing how the Church’s messaging / resources have changed. The new resources are aimed at doubters and those who support them. The Church published two new essays as part of its “Topics & Questions” / “Gospel Topics” section: one called “Seeking Answers to Your Questions” (for those who themselves are doubting), and another called “Helping Others with Their Questions” (for members who have loved ones or friends experiencing doubt). Why is this News? Both curiosity and subtextual skepticism, "because it’s quiet, a little too quiet". Its interesting because the Church almost never telegraphs major cultural pivots. Subtle compassion is showing up in manuals, leader training, and Church content: quietly, without fanfare. That makes it more sociologically intriguing. "Something significant is happening" RNS framed it as strategic pastoral evolution, empathetic and maybe long overdue. The Salt Lake Tribune, being more critical, implied the quiet tone could reflect timidness or caution, unknown risks, like Church wants to change without alienating its base or appearing reactive to critics. What both seem sure of is this institution is shifting tone in a way that signals long-term reform but it’s doing it in the most Mormon way possible: calm, careful, almost invisible. The Older Messaging In previous years, rhetoric around doubt often just emphasized the danger of doubt, avoiding doubt, how doubt is from the devil, that doubters should avoid certain influences, or implying that doubt is necessarily under your control. I agree a bit, if we want my dad to not be angry, we suggest he not watch the news. But he's already seen the news, and believes "X", what now? Elder Dale Renlund’s 2019 remarks warned about “perpetual doubters,” or statements that people who allow doubt to dominate are opening a door for negative influences. The New Way to Engage: 1. Listen Well and Ask Many More Questions The essays encourage listening with humility and empathy. They advise members to avoid judging, to acknowledge and respect questions, to ask open-ended questions like “How do you feel?” or “Can you tell me more?” instead of dismissing or shaming. 2. Avoid Negative Presumptions They also recognize that many people who doubt have already done research or thought through questions internally, not assume that a doubter is uninformed, lazy, or simply looking for excuses. 3. Be Very Patient and Longsuffering The materials stress that the struggle with doubt may take time. They encourage patience, continued love / relationship, even while faith isn’t fully settled. Try not to engage thinking there is a quick fix. Why Is It Low Key? The Church has not made this a loud, high-profile campaign. There was a brief press release when the essays were first released (Dec 2023), and some internal communications (e.g. to educators) when updates were made (June 2024). But the general membership's awareness, especially among people not closely following church publications or media, many seem unaware these resources exist. Even some bishops said they hadn’t heard of them. Is it a Long Game strategy? Are they working behind the scenes? Large institutions often pilot changes quietly before up scaling them. Imagine a Preach My Gospel 2.0, new temple interviews and missionary discussions implementing this more empathic direction over a checklist of orthodoxy. The Hope of Retention By recognizing the emotional / intellectual struggles of people who doubt, the Church may be better positioned to retain members who are wrestling with questions. Feeling listened to and respected tends to reduce alienation. Since “faith crises” are a major reason people leave or become inactive, providing tools for empathy and open conversation may stem some losses. In a more connected, information-rich world, many people encounter critical histories, doctrinal questions, scientific issues, etc. The Church seems to be acknowledging that people will have questions, and it’s better to help them address those than ignore them and hope they'll go away. It signals an adjustment toward more transparency (at least in tone), though not necessarily the sort of "full disclosure" of all contentious topics like critics suggest, but more willingness to engage. What is seen. Doubters are sharing more openly online and in podcasts. Churches who ignore that often seem out of touch. Adjusting messaging helps the LDS Church stay relevant to information-savvy people. It also helps shape the narrative from "doubt is the problem," it becomes "doubters are people we want to engage with compassionately." For existing members, especially those who have friends or family doubting, this change in message gives them tools for more compassionate conversation. It may help reduce friction; less shame, perhaps fewer defensive reactions, more conversations. Public perception may improve among observers who have seen faith communities deal with doubt poorly. If the Church is seen as more humane in this area, that could aid its social reputation. Risk of Resistance? While many see this shift as positive, there are also criticism and risk. People are watching to see whether this is genuinely implemented or just ornamental. The Church didn’t widely promote these resources, many aren’t aware of them. Tools are only useful if people know about them. Critics argue that doing it quietly limits impact. Local leaders (bishops, etc.) may not incorporate these messages into talks, classes, calls, etc., so the change doesn’t reach the grassroots. Not everyone welcomes change. Some members prefer traditional messaging, unambiguous authority, firm verses, fewer shades of ambiguity. So, there may be pushback. Also, some may see this shift as diluting doctrine or weakening discipline, so there may be tension. Some are set in their ways, still give talks that revert to older styles; doubt as sin, doubt as a lack of faith, etc. Some members may feel confusion, they read compassionate resources from the top but still hearing more traditional warnings, and we'll get a mixed message. While the tone in essays / resources may be more empathetic, but individual experiences vary. For many doubters, the way they are treated in their local congregation, by family, by leaders, may still be harsh or dismissive. The institutional messaging is one thing; lived experience is another. Church culture over decades has built up expectations and attitudes that are harder to change. Habit, local norms, peer culture matter. The resources don’t necessarily promise that every historical, scientific, doctrinal difficulty will be fully resolved or explained in ways satisfying to every doubter. Some topics remain controversial, and the Church should probably still control how much is discussed in official settings. What They'll Say: anti-LDS voices Voices critical of the LDS Church (ex-members) will interpret this shift in various ways. Some may see it as: A. Progress They may view these changes as evidence the Church is recognizing pains among its members and the dangers of alienation, stopping the exodus, so is attempting corrective change. For critics who feel the Church has previously been too harsh or dismissive toward doubt, this can be welcomed. B. Too little, too late Others may hold on to the old narrative with deeper issues. Even if local leadership changes, people will still either be hurt by ongoing or past dismissive or judgmental behavior. A critics firm in their new identity, may not want doubters to stay in situations that cause harm (e.g. mental health, identity issues) when leaving is healthiest (or personally lucrative) path in their minds. Retention Matters More Than Conversion Sociologists like Stark, Finke, and Putnam say: Retention is far more powerful than conversion in determining long-term membership. Even a small improvement in member retention rates can produce exponential growth over decades. Here’s why: The Church activity rates vary by region (North America: ~40–45%, Latin America: ~25–35%, Africa/Philippines: ~55–65%). The Church adds ~250,000–300,000 converts per year and "loses" roughly the same through inactivity or quiet resignation. Now, imagine: If conversion stays flat but retention improves by just 10–15%, that means hundreds of thousands more people stay engaged annually. Those retained members raise families, serve missions, and reinforce local units leading to organic generational growth without needing more proselytizing effort. Within one generation (20 years), that could mean a 30–50% increase in active members even with no rise in baptisms. That’s how denominations stabilize after "crisis decades." Catholicism, Evangelicalism, and the LDS Church all see that pattern when pastoral care improves. Why the "Shift to Doubters" Is the Retention Fix Sociologists of religion (like Jana Riess, Benjamin Knoll, and Armand Mauss) have shown that disbelief is not what leads to disaffection. When people feel: unheard, shamed for questions, or made to choose between faith or honesty… they leave. But when they feel safe to wrestle with questions inside the faith, even if they don’t get tidy answers, they tend to stay connected, even if less rigidly. The Church’s new messaging is basically designed to keep emotional and social belonging intact while someone processes doubt. Normalize questioning as part of faith development (echoing scriptural wrestles: Enos, Alma the Younger, Peter’s doubt, etc.). Empower family and leaders to respond with empathy rather than fear or judgment. In short, this is the psychological equivalent of patching a major leak in the retention pipeline. Membership Stabilization, Then Growth If this institutional shift holds, here’s what the next 10–25 years can look like. Instead of plateauing or declining (as mainline Protestant churches did), the LDS Church could maintain positive net growth, especially globally. The largest "inactive" demographic of mid-age members and post-mission millennials will start to reengage through family networks and online fellowship. Gen Alpha Latter-day Saints will have been raised in homes where questions are accepted, will have lower attrition rates in college years. As the "Faith crisis" becomes a normal stage of development, not a point of exit. Religious social scientists predict that when a faith tradition transitions from rigid to resilient, it retains roughly 70–80% more of each generation. Over time, openness to questioning will yield a stronger intellectual ecosystem within the Church: faithful scholarship, spiritual depth, and nuanced teaching. This could make future leaders more relatable, adaptive, and confident in addressing tough issues. What Likely Will Happen in the Future The Church may begin to more proactively publicize these resources, mentioning them in General Conferences, local meetings, or via social media—so more members know. As feedback comes in, the Church might add more resources, covering more difficult, complicated, or controversial questions. Possibly more multimedia: videos, small group curriculums for doubters. Over time, if messaging is consistent, there could be a cultural shift among members: more open conversations about questions, less stigma about doubting, more patience among families and leaders. That might mean more members staying, not leaving, when faced with challenges. I won't fail to suggest God himself may have inspired this correction. The Lord is guiding the Church to build Zion through love and patience rather than fear and exclusion. There’s strong evidence this shift was deliberate and data-driven, not accidental. The Church has world-class data analysts. The Correlation Department and Research Information Division track membership activity and exit causes across thousands of units. Anonymized metrics show where and why members disengage. This "doubter empathy" rollout began now after years of data has been pointing to relational causes, not doctrinal disbelief alone. We’ve been learning from Catholic and Evangelical patterns The Vatican’s post-Vatican II reforms and the Evangelical “Deconstruction” response both showed that compassion and humility slow the loss curve dramatically. Between 2010 and 2020, the Church quietly gathered an enormous amount of data through exit interviews, internal surveys, and monitoring of online discourse, of the "lost generation" (mostly Millennials) revealed why people left: not disbelief in doctrine per se, but feeling dismissed, gaslit, or unheard when they asked tough questions. That’s why the new messaging focuses on relational trust, which the data showed is the real tipping point. So, now in the mid-2020s, the Church knows exactly what was driving disengagement. We’re in a world-wide disillusionment cycle. Governments are distrusted. Media is manipulative. Algorithms reward misinformation. All institutions are assumed to lie. That’s the post-trust era sociologists like Shoshana Zuboff and Jonathan Haidt describe, and the LDS Church seems to have read that moment perfectly. Because in a world where everyone’s "selling" something, what Gen Z and Alpha people crave is sincerity. Boomers still believed in hierarchies and brand loyalty. Gen Z believes if it smells funky, it’s dead. The Church of Boomers can’t win Gen Z’s heart by appeals to "the Church is true. So, stay and obey." but it can demonstrating honesty, humility, and stability, "the Church is a source of answers and belonging, if you keep the faith while you work it out." Ether 12:23–27 "I give unto men weakness that they may be humble... then will I make weak things become strong" When external critics (online ex-LDS communities, TikTok “truth exposers,” etc.) attack Church culture for "stonewalling," this new approach neutralizes that entire line of attack. In other words, the Church isn’t trying to win arguments anymore, it’s learning to outlast the outrage cycle. That’s wisdom. The LDS Church historically excelled with Boomers - who admired its order, structure, and clean family values. But Gen Z’s radar for manipulation and gaslighting is extremely sensitive, they grew up with influencers, propaganda, and trusted institutions lying to them. They won’t accept perfection, for there is none, but they’ll trust sincerity. They won’t follow blindly, but they’ll trust someone who admits uncertainty yet stays faithful anyway. It’s all been expertly timed to coincide with the next leadership handoff - a moment when tone and style can refresh without doctrinal overhaul. It's the most data-backed institutional reform in modern LDS history: emotionally literate, empirically informed, and future-proof. Whether one attributes that to divine guidance or brilliant institutional learning - the outcome is the same. The Church is shifting just in time to regain trust in the Age of Distrust. If they stay consistent for the next decade could make the LDS Church one of the few religions that actually grows in the West through the 2030s and 2040s.

It's completely off screen. [The body cam of the officer shooting the suspect is not looking straight forward, its pointed right, centered on another person/officer by a tree with a gun. When the shots are fired the cam is still pointed at a different person.]

Over $5 Million US The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints recently committed $5.1 million US to the American Red Cross to support several key initiatives: blood‐donation efforts, funding new collection equipment, and bolstering programs for sickle cell disease treatment. The donation is partly aimed at securing platelet collection devices, red blood cell machines, and equipment to support new donor centers. In-kind Donations Beyond the monetary gift, they gave disaster relief kits, with essentials such as hygiene items, for those affected by disasters. Use of Church Facilities, Mobilization Logistics, Volunteers and Blood Drives: Organizing, hosting, or staffing thousands of blood drives where Church members donate blood. While not always described in detail, there is reference to mobilizing “thousands of volunteers,” using Church meetinghouses or buildings for blood drives or as shelters, or facilitating donation drives. The Church is the single largest host of such drives for the Red Cross, annually giving tens of thousands of blood units via these drives. These are also "in kind", in terms of donating space, manpower, organizational infrastructure. Tours for Red Cross Leaders The Church and Red Cross are deepening cooperation: Red Cross leaders toured the Church’s humanitarian facilities (Welfare Square, Bishops’ Central Storehouse) to better understand Church operations and strengthen institutional ties. The Church has a long history of working with the Red Cross; for example, they hosted blood drives over decades, provided disaster relief kits, and mobilized volunteers. The tours by Red Cross leadership foster transparency and allow cross‐learning of humanitarian logistics and infrastructure. Health Equity & Sickle Cell The mention of sickle cell disease is notable. That’s a condition predominantly affecting African Americans and other marginalized groups. Supporting more compatible blood units for sickle cell patients is a targeted health equity intervention. In effect, the church is using its resources not just for broad charitable giving, but targeting areas where care is uneven or under‐resourced. Collaborations like this can improve public perceptions of the church, especially among nonmembers who see the tangible benefits. This donation is large enough to be visible in some news media. KSL (Utah's news outlet) “Church of Jesus Christ donates $5.1 M to American Red Cross” — describes how the funds will be used (blood donation programs, equipment, help for sickle cell treatment). Notes that the LDS Church is the largest single contributor to American Red Cross blood drives, with Latter-day Saints donating ~97,000 units of blood annually. Gives historical background: more than one million units collected across thousands of drives over decades. American Red Cross press release Confirms the church’s gift, mentions in‐kind donations (disaster relief kits), thousands of blood drives, volunteer mobilization. Yahoo / Aggregated News In a short summary: “The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints has gifted over $5 million to the American Red Cross … according to a press release …”

Cool beans, it may take me a bit to read and put together a full reply to your questions, if I'm able at all, I'm not the best for the task. Awesome poster. I hope you'll stick around for a while. That's an exceptionally detailed and critical analysis of the alleged parallels between Thomas' The Philosophy of a Future State and Joseph Smith's revelations. You are correct in observing that many of the supposed "parallels" rely on common biblical themes and that the specific theological details often diverge significantly. Your critique highlights the importance of distinguishing between: Shared Vocabulary: Terms common to contemporary Christian discourse (e.g., "Throne of God," "angels/embassies"). Shared General Concepts: Broad philosophical ideas (e.g., a multi-part soul, a hierarchy of beings, post-mortal progress) found across various religious and philosophical traditions. Specific, Unique Parallels: Concrete, detailed concepts or phrases that are the direct signature of an influence. You are correct that the Book of Abraham does not use the phrase "common centre". Thomas uses it to describe the universe's mechanical rotation. Joseph Smith's scripture focuses the "center" concept on a single, literal star, Kolob, not the entire systems of the universe. You are correct in your assessment of Thomas' intention and theology. Thomas does not call the "Throne of God" a star or planet. Given his belief in God's universal omnipresence (which you correctly noted), he struggles to reconcile this with the biblical tradition of a specific, localized "throne." So he is describing a massive, central region or body of creation, a "material creation", that is so grand it could metaphorically represent the omnipresent God's "throne." This is distinct from Joseph Smith’s theology, which posits God as a corporeal being requiring a specific, organized location (a "residence"). Smith did not adopt Thomas' model. To claim Joseph Smith must have gotten the biblical term "Throne of God" from reading Thomas' book (which quotes the Bible) is illogical and assumes the least likely possibility. The term "Throne of God" is ubiquitous in Christian culture. Thomas explicitly sources it from the Bible (e.g., Revelation 4:2, Psalms 11:4). The specific parallel cited by critics is not the term itself, but the use of the term - in a cosmic hierarchy context: Thomas is looking for a physical reality that corresponds to the biblical "Throne of God" to serve as a common center for all other systems. In both cases, the "Throne of God," exerts cosmic control. This specific combination is the parallel, but the source for the term itself is unquestionably the Bible for both authors. The most concrete evidence that Joseph Smith or his close associates were aware of and used Thomas' ideas comes from Oliver Cowdery's public writings. In December 1836, Cowdery's newspaper, the Messenger and Advocate, published lengthy, uncredited excerpts from Thomas' book, including passages about the plurality of worlds. W. W. Phelps wrote a poem in the same year that contains language highly reminiscent of Thomas' writings. While this doesn't prove Joseph Smith personally read the entire book before receiving the Book of Abraham revelation (circa 1835-1842), it confirms the ideas and specific terminology from Thomas' work were in the immediate intellectual atmosphere of the early Mormon leadership when the Book of Abraham was being produced. Thomas does not explicitly use the phrase "uncreated beings" to describe the spirits on other worlds. This phrase is a summary used by critics to capture the implication of his argument against creation ex nihilo (creation out of nothing) and his discussion of eternal matter. Like Smith, Thomas supported the idea that matter is eternal and indestructible (they agree on some level). His "intelligences" are the inhabitants of an infinite, eternal creation, often called "progressive beings" advancing toward perfection. Thomas places man at the bottom of the intellectual scale. Smith's theology places man at the pinnacle of this creation, as the offspring of God. The parallel relies on two specific pieces of vocabulary: "Intelligences": Used to describe the spiritual/intellectual inhabitants of the cosmos. "Progressive Beings": Used to describe the ongoing, eternal nature of these spirits' development.

That's what I mean. Unless the fine was money that won't be missed, the costs will get passed along to fans somehow.

I don't want them to have ban paying fans on mass. I'd feel better if they could instead offset the fine by passing on the fine on to the fans at the risk of a ban, they can catch some of the consequence.

Well, fact that the shooter was equipped with an assault rifle, multiple IEDs, and chose a solid Sunday morning time strongly suggests a long-awaited plot to maximize casualties. The Ex-Mormons gave an unconfirmed report that the Grand Blanc Stake Conference was originally scheduled for the day of the shooting September 28th and then moved. This comes from a user comment on the r/exmormon subreddit; "I live in the area. They were not having stake conference. They were going to have it yesterday, but two weeks ago moved it to a later date." If true, a minor miracle that he just missed the larger Stake Conference, perhaps he may have even tried to target the conference and failed. For the non-LDS: The Church was the Grand Blanc Michigan Stake Center which is designed to be regional hub for multiple congregations (Wards/Branches), as Stake Conference would be during a peak "crossover" meeting time when the total number of people on site is at its highest, encompassing a vast number of children, youth, and adults with overflow of seats set up in to the Culture Hall. This number would be vastly greater than attending a simple, single-Ward meetinghouse. The attacker may have planned for a larger crowd of multiple Wards. Unlike the General Conferences, Stake Conferences times are set at the local level and do not happen on a single, standardized global date. It is an unverified account being shared. It is not an official statement from the Church or law enforcement. Is anyone able to verify that there was a Conference scheduled for the 28th and then moved?

He could have plotted it for years. The Utah civil rent dispute, assuming Thomas Jacob Sanford was likely the renter, the most likely reason it would be a landlord filing an eviction, an "unlawful detainer" action, to regain possession of a property, usually because the tenant has either failed to pay rent or violated a material term of the lease. If Sanford's move to Utah was for a "fresh start" that then involved a relationship with an LDS woman and ended in a conflict where he refused to conform (e.g., getting rid of his tattoos), a subsequent eviction would represent a concrete, deeply personal public failure. The forced loss of housing due to an eviction, combined with the personal rejection over his non-conformity, would have solidified his feeling that the LDS community was responsible for the failure of his new life in Utah, directly feeding the reported motive. He took out a mortgage loan on his Michigan property in 2021. This suggests the Utah dispute occurred sometime prior to or around 2021. He's been simmering for at least 4 years.

CBS News article, the apparent motive for the Grand Blanc church attack centers on a personal grievance and a hatred toward the LDS faith stemming from the shooter's grievance with a Utah relationship with an LDS woman. White House Press Secretary Karoline Leavitt stated on Fox News that FBI Director Kash Patel told her the suspect, Thomas Jacob "Jake" Sanford, "hated people of the Mormon faith." A local political candidate, Kris Johns, who met Sanford last week, told CBS News that Sanford had a strong dislike for the LDS church. Sanford reportedly shared that he moved to Utah for a fresh start, where he started a relationship with a Latter-day Saint woman. According to Johns' recollection, Sanford stated that the woman and her community "wanted me to get rid of my tattoos. They wanted me to do all this stuff, and I wouldn't do it." This refusal to conform, coupled with his alleged belief that church followers "believe they're above Jesus," fueled his specific animosity toward the faith. Johns emphasized that Sanford did not mention Charlie Kirk, Donald Trump, or any current political figures to him, despite the political signage found near his home. In essence, the emerging motive suggests the attack was a revenge fantasy rooted in a personal, painful rejection experienced in Utah, which the shooter generalized into a hatred for the entire LDS faith.

So far, we know the suspect, Thomas Jacob Sanford, was a local resident. Who in the past lived in Utah, he faced a personal civil rent dispute in Utah. There is now an update he has past criminal convictions for Burglary and OWI (Operating While Intoxicated), here.

I'd rather have the killer an ex-mormon for a knowing hateful reason than a dumb unknowing mistake, like manipulated into doing this by a news article, youtuber or a sermon. I prefer a clear, internal motive over one that seems random or based on a misunderstanding. If the shooter was an ex-Mormon, the act is rooted in a known, painful, or pre-existing conflict. The violence, while abhorrent, is then coherent with a history of trauma or apostate rage. It would tell us that this is a confined issue if the killer is a "known" entity, one that could hypothetically be addressed. If the shooter was a non-Mormon manipulated by external influence, from years of demonization in media, the attack is random, external, and unpredictable. It means the community was attacked not for what it is, but because of its public perception. I hope the Michigan shooter knew what he was doing, rather than just a dummy affected by propaganda, because there could be other dummies out there. It's a desire to find meaning and logic in a senseless tragedy. Your preference reflects a desire for a motive that is internal to the community's experience rather than one that is external and random. A way to impose an understandable logic onto the event rather than having to admitting to a larger problem, like simply the US today is a divisive and emotionally charged environment, where politics and religion are seen as a reason for a violent conflict.

I fear that most, I just hope it's plain old anti-Mormon hate, not some misguided fool thinking he's avenging Kirk. There was a "Columbine Shooting"-Level planned attack. And I read about 8 were shot including children, 2 of the 8 are dead (I'm not sure if they are repeating the old number counting the shooter), there could be as many as 20-30 people under the burning rubble.

The current status of the victims' injuries is unknown at this time, so it is not clear from the available information if anyone was killed besides the shooter. Reports also mention that the church was on fire, and the suspected shooter may have started the fire. The identity and a clear motive are not yet public, as the investigation is in its early stages. My personal fear is, I hope it is not the case, it might be a reaction to Charlie Kirk assassination, as some voices, particularly from evangelical circles, like Mark Driscoll, claim "heretical 'Mormon doctrine' somehow fostered this violence" (Source)

I was watching the live stream of Thoughtful Faith when there was a spamming anti-LDS person in chat, who wouldn't confess his denomination, but his defense hints that he was a never-LDS Catholic. My impression is Catholic trolls have started haunting Thoughtful Faith ever since the Trent Horne debate. Its very interesting as I've never seen aggressive Catholic critics before. It almost seems like maybe they didn't exist until now, they seem to be amateurs, in that they are unfamiliar or not equipped to address LDS criticisms of Catholicism and only possess a googled set of LDS criticisms. But while touting how small and insignificant we are, he used the "inactivity" and "leaving in droves" bash. There was also a topic here that touched the issue, though in a tangential manner. It seems the "inactivity" bash is a common theme in online discussions, particularly on ex-Mormon forums (like r/exmormon) and among other Christian and Atheist critics of The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints. It centers on the vast disparity between the official ∼17.2 million reported members and the estimated 5-6 million active, weekly attendees worldwide. Critics seize on this to argue that the Church's official growth and membership numbers are inflated, which they view as either a clever burn or evidence of the Church is in decline. An Example Online: There is this gloating reaction to any data undermining the Church's growth numbers: Representative Link: Reddit r/exmormon: Turns out church membership isn't falling because people are losing faith... (Snippet from comment section: "My parents had 4 children. We are all out or inactive. My parents had 13 grandchildren. All but one is out or inactive. We are 6th generation membership. The mormon church is dying.") Its an effort to invalidate the Church, to validate the decision to leave, or for never-LDS, justify dismissing it outright. Fallacies and Falsehoods As for the claim that LDS activity is low or even the lowest: This is factually false. Studies consistently show that the LDS Church is among the highest, reporting weekly attendance rate (typically ∼67%) among its members compared to Catholicism (∼33%) and general Protestantism (∼44%) in the United States. While the gap between reported and active members is large for the LDS Church, a gap exists for virtually all religions. They try to compare it to a business which is a false equivalence: For most churches, including the Catholic Church, baptisms are permanent and many Protestant denominations do not purge membership rolls simply for non-attendance. Fallacy: No True Scotsman The Argument (from the critics' perspective): "The only people who count are active members, so those inactives aren't 'true' members, and the Church should stop counting them." The Flaw: This attempts to narrow the definition of "member" to suit the critic's desired outcome (a smaller number). By the Church's definition, membership is conferred through baptism and requires a formal action (resignation) to remove. The criticism is not against the Church's data, but against its policy of record-keeping. Fallacy: Hasty Generalization The Argument: "My ward is a ghost town; therefore, the whole Church is declining rapidly worldwide." The Flaw: This is a generalization from a non-representative sample. While secularization may cause decline in many Western wards, global growth is driven by the Global South (Africa, Philippines, Latin America), and activity rates are often significantly higher than in the U.S. or Europe. The activity bash functions as a way for critics to use the Church's own data policy against it, translating a legitimate statistical observation (high inactivity) into a rhetorical tool for declaring the institution's spiritual failure. However, a comparative analysis shows that the high activity rate among its members (compared to others) remains a distinguishing feature of the LDS Church. The "Mass Exodus" or "Leaving in Droves" Cradle retention is a the key metric for long-term survival. The Church has historically performed better than most other major Christian bodies in the U.S. Critics correctly point out that convert retention is terrible (25−35%). The true test of whether LDS are going extinct is not just new members going inactive but the BiC (Born in the Covenant) who fully leave or switch. Independent studies like the Pew Research Center's Religious Landscape Study show that the LDS Church's percentage of those raised in the faith who still identify as members as adults is often higher than that of Catholicism and mainline Protestantism, even if the rate is declining. Virtually all Christian denominations in the West are experiencing net losses or stagnation. The Catholic Church has a massive net loss due to switching, and nearly half of those raised Protestant no longer identify as such. The LDS Church has a somewhat uniquely binary nature of membership: either you're "all in" or you're out, creating the "ex-Mormon" community to magnify inactivity as the perception of a crisis. Fallacy: Confirmation Bias and Availability Heuristic The Argument: "I see hundreds of people resigning on Reddit every day, and my local ward is shrinking, therefore the Church is failing globally." The Flaw: This relies on the Availability Heuristic—the tendency to judge the frequency of an event by how easily examples come to mind. Online forums like r/exmormon or r/atheism are self-selecting echo chambers, making the "exiting" experience highly visible and giving a distorted view of the global membership trend. The Confirmation Bias ensures that only stories supporting the decline narrative are celebrated. Fallacy: Focus on "Moral Failure" The Argument: People are leaving due to failure of "the truth claims" (polygamy, historic evidence, church finances, etc) which is a unique moral failure of this church, unlike others. The Flaw: While those issues are a powerful catalysts for LDS members, people leave all religions for doctrinal, moral, and social reasons. The "Leaving in Droves" narrative tends to ignore that there is also a vast secularization trend affecting all Western religions. Any exodus thought to be a sign of the LDS Church's singular fraudulence, is simply not true. Is Mormonism Failing? U.S. retention struggles, the Church does report record global growth in converts and activity in its youth education programs (Seminary and Institute). The reason for the loss in retention is the High-Demand challenge; time, tithing, mission, lifestyle. Millennials and Gen Z are struggling to reconcile the Church's conservative stances on social issues (like LGBTQ+ inclusion and gender roles) with their generation's more inclusive and pluralistic values. However, sociologists of religion often point to the stability of high-demand religious groups those that require significant time, financial, and behavioral commitments (like tithing, missions, and a strict health code) as a strength. While the LDS Church struggles with convert retention, the members it does retain demonstrate exceptionally high commitment. Surveys show Latter-day Saints are far more likely than mainline Protestants and Catholics in the US to say religion is "very important," pray daily, and attend services weekly. The high demands create a highly cohesive, supportive, and insular community. This strong social fabric is a powerful defense against the general trend of secularization and the "rise of the nones" that is eroding mainline denominations. For an active, core member, the financial (tithing) and time (callings, temple attendance) investments are so high that leaving becomes a much more costly proposition, strengthening loyalty and reducing "casual" disaffiliation. Outpacing the Competition in Core Activity In a comparison that matters more than total population, the LDS Church is outperforming the declining Christian sectors in terms of activity and institutional stability in the US. The LDS Church's high activity rate means that despite having smaller membership totals than Catholics or Evangelicals, its actual, participating membership is a much larger proportion of its total. If the future of Christianity in the US is one of decline, the LDS Church is sociologically structured to be one of the last religious institutions standing, due to its high demands creating high commitment and its distinctive theology creating ideological clarity. The "win" would be measured in sustained commitment and organizational integrity, not necessarily in outgrowing the world population. Strong Familial Cohesion The emphasis on family life is perhaps the most critical driver of long-term membership retention, especially in developed nations where religious affiliation is declining. The core doctrine of eternal families and the practice of temple sealings provides an ultimate, transcendental purpose for marriage and child-rearing, incentivizing larger-than-average families. LDS families, particularly active ones, tend to have higher fertility rates than the surrounding populations in many countries. This factor is crucial for organic growth and offseting attrition from switching, a major challenge for many other denominations. Financial Security Estimates place the Church's investment fund is so large that its investment returns alone are reportedly sufficient to perpetually cover the Church's annual operating costs, effectively making the organization self-sustaining and financially secure for the long term, regardless of future fluctuations in membership. Catholic Church's financial structure is complex and often faces fiscal challenges, especially at the Vatican level, primarily due to its decentralized structure and heavy historical and operational burdens. Unlike the LDS Church, the vast majority of financial assets and income within the Catholic Church are managed at the level of individual dioceses (local jurisdictions), rather than flowing to a single central authority like the Vatican. The Vatican runs an operating deficit. Its income sources (real estate, museum tickets, and donations like Peter's Pence) often fail to keep pace with expenses. Unique Defense Against Secularism In the end, while seen as weakness to our Brethren, the Open Canon and Continuing Revelation means that truth is not seen as being constrained by the limits of ancient scripture alone. This allows the Church to offer new revelation to address contemporary issues, offering a mechanism for the Church to adapt or issue new guidance without betraying a "closed" scriptural record. By rejecting the traditional Christian doctrine of creation ex nihilo (out of nothing) and instead teaching that matter is eternal and was organized by God, LDS theology bypasses the classic philosophical dilemma of theodicy (why evil exists in a world created by an omnipotent, benevolent God). This cosmology places a strong emphasis on radical free agency and the independent, eternal nature of human intelligence.

The "Throne of God" The most frequently cited parallel relates to the concept of a grand, physical center of the universe. Thomas D!ck's The Philosophy of a Future State (1829) "It is now considered by astronomers, as highly probable, if not certain… that all the systems of the universe revolve round one common centre… If this is in reality the case, it may, with the most emphatic propriety, be termed, the throne of God… This grand central body may be considered as the capital of the universe." (pp. 244-246) "And I saw the stars, that they were very great, and that one of them was nearest unto the throne of God; and there were many great ones which were near unto it; And the name of the great one is Kolob, because it is near unto me, for I, Abraham, saw it; it is the first creation, nearest to the celestial, or the residence of God." (Abraham 3:2-3) Key Parallels: The Throne of God: Both D!ck's speculation and Joseph Smith's revelation use the precise phrase "the throne of God" to describe this cosmic central location. Governing Power: D!ck suggests this center is where "embassies may be occasionally dispatched to all surrounding worlds," aligning with the Book of Abraham's description of Kolob as a great "governing power." Now ancient Egyptians did have a view of the cosmos that, in some ways, parallels the concepts in the Book of Abraham and Thomas D!ck's writings. It was geocentric, with the celestial North Pole was seen as a pivot or central point of rotation. The stars around the celestial North Pole were considered "imperishable" because they never sank below the horizon. They were a powerful symbol of immortality and were often associated with the afterlife of the pharaoh, who wished to become one of these stars. Visualized as the "mount of heaven," a divine location from which certain stellar races were said to have originated. This concept aligns with a central, revered location in the cosmos. "Intelligences" Thomas D!ck's The Philosophy of a Future State (1829) D!ck speculates that many of these stars are peopled by "various orders of intelligences" and that these intelligences are "progressive beings" in various stages of evolution toward perfection. (p. 230) "Now the Lord had shown unto me, Abraham, the intelligences that were organized before the world was; and among all these there were many of the noble and great ones... and he said: These I will make my rulers; for he stood among those that were spirits, and he saw that they were good; and he said unto me: Abraham, thou art one of them; thou wast chosen before thou wast born." (Abraham 3:22-23) Key Parallels: Intelligences: Both texts use the specific, non-biblical term "intelligences" to refer to spiritual or uncreated beings who inhabit the cosmos. Various Orders: Both texts establish a hierarchy, with D!ck mentioning "various orders" and Abraham describing a system where some are "noble and great ones" and others are lesser. Progression: D!ck's mention of "progressive beings" echoes the LDS concept of eternal progression, though the theological details of perfection differ between the two authors. Egyptian "Ka" (Life Force), the essence of the "double-form" created at birth, was thought to have "always existed" and was "passed across the successive generations, carrying the spiritual force of the first creation." This mirrors the idea of a primordial, uncreated substance of intelligence. It is important to note that while the language and concepts are strikingly similar, many Latter-day Saint scholars emphasize the differences in the overall theological framework (e.g., D!ck viewing God as omnipresent and ethereal versus Joseph Smith's corporeal God) to argue against direct plagiarism, suggesting instead that the book may have served as a cultural vocabulary for Smith's gift to work with.

I agree that even contemporary non-LDS discoveries are themselves parallel evidence of restoration rather than a fabrication. Dan Vogel's argument, however, is that Joseph Smith’s specific, unique theological concepts in the Book of Abraham were derived from contemporaneous, published American sources. Cosmology: The Plurality of Worlds and Governing Stars The Book of Abraham's cosmology, particularly the concept of Kolob, is widely believed by critics to have been inspired by the popular astronomical writings of the 19th century, particularly those of the Scottish minister, writer, and astronomer, Thomas D!ck (1774–1857). D!ck's work, which was popular and circulated widely in the US, attempted to reconcile Newtonian astronomy with Christian theology. Source: Thomas D!ck, The Philosophy of a Future State (1829). The Plurality of Worlds: D!ck heavily promoted the idea that the universe was filled with innumerable stars and that these stars were likely peopled by various orders of intelligences (similar to Abraham's "intelligences"). He suggested that these intelligences were progressive beings evolving toward perfection. The Center of the Universe: D!ck speculated that the systems of the universe revolve around a common centre...the throne of God. The Kolob Parallel: Critics see this as the direct source for the idea of Kolob which is described as the star "nearest unto the throne of God" and the "great governing one" of the celestial bodies. The Book of Abraham then applies a system of decreasing greatness and increasing time measurement as one moves farther from this center, mirroring the hierarchical nature of D!ck’s infinite and orderly universe. An excerpt from D!ck’s work was published by Oliver Cowdery in the Latter Day Saints' Messenger and Advocate in December 1836, confirming that his associates had access to it during the time of the Book of Abraham translation. Joseph Smith is recorded as donating a copy to the Nauvoo Library and Literary Institute in 1844. Sources like that forms the core of the naturalistic argument: Joseph Smith's unique doctrinal elements are claimed to be a creative synthesis of known theological and scientific/philosophical ideas popular among American religious seekers in his era. I don't think Vogel shows Joseph took from those sources without presupposing a naturalistic view first to say he must have, but he effectively counters the apologist claims that Joseph must be a prophet, as he could not have had access to these ideas before later discoveries, like the Apocalypse of Abraham, were found.

Yes, have nothing suggesting Jesus will leave.

I was hoping to have summoned "CA Steve" so he could take the issue on himself. It seems this is the common position of critical scholars of Mormonism who argue for a naturalistic origin of the Book of Abraham, namely Dan Vogel. I'll try to steelman Vogel. Vogel's 2020 book, Book of Abraham Apologetics: A Review and Critique, there he claims that the purported "unique" elements found in the Book of Abraham; such as Terah's idolatry, Abraham's attempted sacrifice, and his astronomical knowledge, were known to Joseph Smith's contemporaries and available in popular religious literature of the time. This mirrors "CA Steve's" claim. He uses of sources like Clarke's Bible Commentary and Brown's Bible Dictionary to show Terah's idolatry was a known theme was a common scholarly tactic in this field, and Vogel cites numerous contemporary sources to establish this cultural and literary context. The argument that themes like the pre-existence were commonly debated in 19th-century American religious thought by figures like Noah Worcester and Hosea Ballou is also a standard feature of naturalistic explanations for the content of early Mormon scripture. The ex-Mormon's point rests on the idea that Joseph Smith did not need access to non-canonical texts to produce similar ideas, because those traditions had already filtered into the popular American Protestant culture of the time through works like: Terah's Idolatry: The Old Testament verse Joshua 24:2 says that Abraham's ancestors "served other gods." This hint was widely elaborated upon in Jewish and later Christian tradition (Midrash), which was then accessible through commentaries and Bible dictionaries (like those mentioned) that Joseph Smith owned or could access. This explains the depiction of Abraham's father, Terah, as an idolater in the Book of Abraham (Abraham 1:5-7). Pre-existence and Cosmology: Themes like the pre-existence of spirits and a complex, hierarchical cosmology governed by a larger star, Kolob, in the Book of Abraham, were also actively discussed in the 19th-century religious environment, often driven by new scientific discoveries in astronomy. This argument reframes alleged "unique" parallels as simply evidence of Joseph Smith synthesizing ideas available in his own cultural and religious milieu. Stephen O. Smoot and other writing in the Interpreter: A Journal of Latter-day Saint Faith and Scholarship (a response to Vogel's book), counter the "contemporary parallels" argument by pointing to evidence that suggests Joseph Smith's text better aligns with ancient, extra-biblical traditions that were demonstrably not widely available in 19th-century America, as the cumulative pattern of these unique traditions strongly suggests an ancient origin. They contend that while Terah's idolatry was common, the specific combination of elements, such as a priest of Pharaoh attempting to sacrifice Abraham on an altar near an image of an idol (Abraham 1:7-12) is so complex that its appearance in the Book of Abraham is more likely a restoration of ancient knowledge than a fabrication based on common commentary.

It was in this thread we were talking: I made similar arguments as you about the parallels in the then undiscovered Apocalypse of Abraham, and he replied to me that Joseph had access to those same parallels in other contemporary works. I'm not an expert in Joseph's private book collection to refute him. I thought it was an interesting claim. I wanted your opinion.

Awesome a new member. Maybe the mods finally fixed... You joined in 2014??!! Darn, it's probably not fixed then. The idolatry of Terah, the premortal existence of spirits and other items are seen in the Apocalypse of Abraham, which the first English translation was released in August 1898. But poster @CA Steve told me:

Regarding the Timing of the City of Enoch's Return According to the Church, the events described in Moses 7 will happen at the time of or just after the Second Coming of Jesus Christ. The City of Enoch will return to the earth. Moses 7:63 states that Enoch and his city "shall meet them there," referring to the righteous inhabitants of the earth who have built the New Jerusalem in the latter days. The sequence of events are that in the latter days, the righteous will build a city called Zion. Then, at the time of the Second Coming, the City of Enoch, which was taken up into heaven, will return and join with it. This fulfills prophecy and unites the two "Zions." The Old Testament seems to expect Zion to be built, while New Testament has a "New Jerusalem" coming out of heaven. Revelation 21: The Apostle John describes a vision of a "new heaven and a new earth." He then sees "the Holy City, the new Jerusalem, coming down out of heaven from God" (Revelation 21:2). The Heart of the Matter - A Place and a People I'm going to guess that the reason you might have come up with this question, is that Latter-day Prophets expand Zion as not currently one place, but anywhere the people are gathered. "Zion" can be anywhere. As the Church has grown worldwide, the emphasis has shifted from a single gathering place to building up "stakes of Zion" in every nation. As President Russell M. Nelson has taught, "The place of gathering for Brazilian Saints is in Brazil; the place of gathering for Nigerian Saints is in Nigeria; the place of gathering for Korean Saints is in Korea. Zion is 'the pure in heart.' It is wherever righteous Saints are." While Zion is a state of being, it is also a specific, physical place. The City of Enoch: Is a literal city, a physical Zion. The New Jerusalem: This is a future city prophesied to be built in Independence, Missouri. The multiple meanings of "Zion" will ultimately converge. The different, smaller "Zions" around the world (the stakes) are preparing people to be worthy to live in the one, great Zion. A single, unified city, composed of the returning City of Enoch and the New Jerusalem, will be the "real Zion." It will be both a place and a people. Regarding Other Worlds and Cities of Enoch The second question delves into a speculative area of LDS theology. While the scriptures clearly state that God has created "worlds without number" (Moses 1:33), the doctrine does not provide specific details about whether each of these worlds has its own version of a "City of Enoch." We don't assume every world will have the same parallel histories or experiences of the Earth, with each one having its own Prophet Enoch, its own translated city, and its own New Jerusalem. The focus of the scriptures is on the plan of salvation as it pertains to this Earth. Therefore, while the existence of other inhabited worlds is a belief, the idea of them having their own specific versions of the City of Enoch is a matter of great speculation and is not explicitly stated in the standard works of the Church. The focus of the doctrine is on this Earth and its inhabitants, and the fulfillment of God's plan on this planet.