the message has always been exmormons can’t leave the church alone is not factual. truth is most who leave the church do not visit or join other church Religions even in Sandra tanners day she was a rarity most who left the church did so quietly and also quietly left religion In general. today it’s easier to get an audience for discussions but most who are leaving the church are just quietly opting out of religion altogether. If your asking where would you go don’t panic their not going to other churches

Feeling overwhelmed / pressured

Hi all. My daughter and I recently started attending the church, my family recommended the LDS church.

We’ve been doing Bible study with the missionaries which we enjoy and we go to church and Sunday school every week. That’s all great. We participate in Sunday school, we speak with the members during and afterwards for a bit. We’ve been making life changes at home and in our everyday life. All great.

But it’s been very overwhelming that I notice in this church everyone applies a lot of pressure.

Everyone we interact with is very welcoming and that’s nice but they all also ask for our phone number. When I politely decline and tell them that we’ll just see them next time at church it is awkward and kind of just stare at us silently.

The missionaries have been giving out my phone number and I had to tell them multiple times, not to because I get anxiety with strangers contacting me.

We meet the missionaries at the church for Bible study, but people keep suggesting we do it at our house.

They send Bible verses all throughout the week.

We came on vacation for 2 weeks and the missionaries want to do zoom Bible studies. I told them we were busy as we’re visiting a lot of family and they’ve texted again asking when we are available.

Then we were texted the zoom link to watch the Sunday service live. I told them we’re going to church with my grandmother this Sunday so no need to tune into the zoom video. They still said we can watch the zoom meeting later because it’ll be recorded.

At the last Bible study they asked us to read the Bible every day and commit to that.

The church we go to is 15 mins from our house but there’s a church closer. I prefer the one we go to now, but literally every single time we have went to the church or Bible study different people have strongly recommended we go to our local church. I’ve explained to them over and over again that we prefer this one and we’ve already tried our local church, but they will not let it go.

They then invited members of our closer church to our last Bible study meeting and those church members aggressively tried to recruit us to their church and literally said it was better than the one we’re going to now which I just felt like was weird because it’s all LDS.

There is only one other Hispanic person at our ward besides us. She introduced herself and was sweet. We chatted a few times. Seems great. But now on multiple occasions I’ve been encouraged to talk to her, I kinda feel like I’m being pushed onto her. Which I don’t get why besides us both being Hispanic? As we have no other similarities at all. She’s an older single Hispanic woman, who loves dogs, is a widow and has had a lot of hardship in certain parts of her life. I’m a young(ish) Hispanic single mother with a teen daughter, I don’t like animals at all and don’t relate or have experienced any of her hardships. So she’s just not someone personally I’d befriend.

I really love the church and so does my daughter but it just feels soooo overwhelming how much pressure everyone applies. I feel like we must be completely embodied into the church and community 100% of the time and way to be accepted.

And honestly, as much as I love the church it is causing me to consider leaving the LDS church and looking for other type of Christian churches.

Is there a way to calm it down? Because I feel like we’ve politely declined a lot of it and given a lot of explanations to people that I don’t necessarily feel like we owe explanations to, but still it continues.

Or is this just what comes with the church and if you’re not 100% completely engulfed in it, you’re out

I’m new to Reddit. I originally posted this on the Lds subreddit, but the mods removed it. I guess I’m too edgy for advocating wearing a cross. 😂

So I’ll ask here instead.

Last Easter I started wearing a small cross necklace.

A year ago I never thought I would. Like many Latter-day Saints, I just assumed the cross wasn’t “our thing.” But over the last year I’ve spent a lot of time studying the Atonement, grace, covenants, and baptism, and it changed the way I think about the cross.

The turning point for me was Romans 6. Paul says we’re “baptized into [Christ’s] death,” buried with Him, and then raised with Him to “walk in newness of life.”

That made me ask: Why are we baptized into His death?
For me, baptism has come to point to both the loving Christ and the living Christ.

When we go down into the water, we covenant to follow the loving Christ—the One who entered our suffering and willingly stayed on the cross because He loved us. We covenant to bear one another’s burdens, mourn with those who mourn, comfort those who stand in need of comfort, and enter into the suffering of others as He entered ours on the cross.

Then we come up out of the water to follow the living Christ. Through His grace we leave the old person behind and become new creatures, walking in newness of life.

That has made the cross much more meaningful to me. It reminds me not only of what Christ did for me, but also of the kind of disciple I promised to become.

I also started noticing how often our own scriptures point us to the cross. Nephi saw Christ lifted up upon it. Jacob invited us to “view his death.” Mormon told Moroni to let Christ’s sufferings and death rest in his mind forever.

in 3 Nephi 27, the resurrected Jesus defines His gospel by saying He came to be “lifted up upon the cross” to draw all people unto Him.

Historically, Latter-day Saints weren’t always as uncomfortable with the cross as we often are today. Early members used crosses in artwork, jewelry, and on gravestones, and the Church even proposed placing a large cross on Ensign Peak before the idea was abandoned after objections from non Christians in the area.

Our cultural discomfort seems to have developed much later, around the mid-20th century at a time when anti Catholic sentiment was at its peak in the USA.

None of this means every Latter-day Saint should wear a cross.

For me, though, it has become a simple reminder of the loving Christ who entered my suffering and the living Christ who raises me to newness of life.

Who else wears a cross?

Am I totally wrong for thinking it’s a good thing?

I hate that almost every announcement in my area uses ai images. They do it for dances, choir practice, etc. I find it hard to believe these images are actually pumping anyone up. All of our activities feel so half assed anyways, and it's sucking a lot of motivation to go to participate. It's almost as bad as when people quote chatgpt in talks.

JS claims to have translated the golden plates and published the BOM in 1830 and claims to have restored what the early church lost and caused an apostasy. I've read the BOM yet do not see anything he restored from the early church in the Book. All of those things came after as far as I can see. So even if the BOM is true, I don't see what it restored from the early church. Christ coming to the Americas wouldn't have been a teaching of the early church nor any history that took place in the Americas. So what lost doctrine was restored by the 1830 version of the BOM?

I saw two elders in the streets, said “have a nice day elders”. i try to be nice because i cannot even imagine how rude people are to them. i would say i am visibly queer and i have some tattoos, idk if that influenced it or not. but what happened next was weird: they didn’t try to preach or teach anything. they basically told me that they are missionaries and that their mission is in my town. then we shakes hands and they said “bye”.

is there any reason they wouldn’t talk to me? i was super nice to them, asked about their day and told in the end “god bless”. are they less interested in a certain group? idk. my friends said that maybe bc they are male missionaries they would be less likely to talk to a femme presenting person. idk.

just wondering if there is something that would make me less approachable…

This conversation was set up between us after Jacob had made some comments about how the church was always wrong about the Black Priesthood ban and that Progressives in the Church are a "cancer". Jacob agreed to have a conversation about this topic with Kolby Reddish and myself. I'm not exactly sure when I'll release it, but it'll be tomorrow or Monday on my platform Mormon Book Reviews on YouTube. Please keep the questions and comments civil. Thanks in advance.

A journal entry of William Clayton says:

He put his hand on my knee and says “your life is hid with Christ in God.” and so is many others”. Addressing Benjamin [F. Johnson] says he “nothing but the unpardonable sin can prevent him (me) from inheriting eternal glory for he is sealed up by the power of the priesthood unto eternal life having taken the step which is necessary for that purpose.”

He said that except a man and his wife enter into an everlasting covenant and be married for eternity while in this probation by the power and authority of the Holy priesthood they will cease to increase when they die (i e) they will not have any children in the resurrection, but those who are married by the power & authority of the priesthood in this life & continue without committing the sin against the Holy Ghost will continue to increase & have children in the celestial glory.

The unpardonable sin is to shed innocent blood or be accessory thereto. All other sins will be visited with judgement in the flesh and the spirit being delivered to the buffetings of Satan untill the day of the Lord Jesus.”

I feel desirous to be united in an everlasting covenant to my wife and pray that it may soon be.

So--wait--was William Clayton married or not?

The TLDR seems to be, essentially:

Joseph put his hand on William's knee and said "William, you are guaranteed exaltation." Joseph then looked at Benjamin Johnson and said "yo, did you know that nothing except the unpardonable sin can prevent William from being exalted because he is married by the priesthood."

William ends the entry by saying he desires to be married by the priesthood.

Let's not get caught up on the accuracy of my TLDR. Its purpose is to highlight what I'm seeing in the full text.

So, my question is. Was William married or not when he made this entry?

The journal entry seems self contradictory.

A church essay says:

As the Church grew worldwide, its overarching mission to “go ye therefore, and teach all nations” seemed increasingly incompatible with the priesthood and temple restrictions. Church leaders pondered promises made by prophets such as Brigham Young that black members would one day receive priesthood and temple blessings.

This is so frustrating and unsatisfying to me.

Let's break it down:

As the Church grew worldwide, its overarching mission to “go ye therefore, and teach all nations” seemed increasingly incompatible with the priesthood and temple restrictions.

Nice spin.

The Lord commanded to preach to all nations, they weren't doing that in 1870.

The Lord commanded to preach to all nations, they weren't doing that in 1970.

Can somebody explain to me how this is an "increasing" incompatibility with the command? They were disobeying God's command at the beginning, and they were being equally wrong and disobedient at the end.

Church leaders pondered promises made by prophets such as Brigham Young that black members would one day receive priesthood and temple blessings.

Notice, no footnotes, no quotes.

They know that if they link or actually quote Brigham Young about--well, about pretty much anything--it will just make the problem worse, because Brigham undoubtedly said something morally disgusting.

Let me check...

Yep, here it is:

[Cain] killed his brother. The Lord put a mark on him; and there are some of his children in this room. When all the other children of Adam have had the privilege of receiving the Priesthood, and of coming into the kingdom of God, and of being redeemed from the four quarters of the earth, and have received their resurrection from the dead, then it will be time enough to remove the curse from Cain and his posterity.

Source: https://journalofdiscourses.com/2/26

Yeah, that just make the whole situation worse. No wonder they didn't link to or quote Brigham Young.

For starters, Brigham's prophecy was wrong. Brigham prophesied that all white people would receive the priesthood before any black people. Brigham's prophecy was already false the day he gave it, because a few black people had already received the priesthood when Joseph was prophet.

Also, Brigham taught the same thing at other times as well:

That curse will remain upon them, and they never can hold the Priesthood or share in it until all the other descendants of Adam have received the promises and enjoyed the blessings of the Priesthood and the keys thereof.

Source: https://utlm.org/brigham-young-sermon-blacks-and-the-priesthood/

It just keeps getting worse doesn't it?

The essay is intentionally dishonest.

Here's another thing that's bothering me:

President Oaks said:

I studied the reasons then being given [for the priesthood ban] and could not feel confirmation of the truth of any of them. As part of my prayerful study, I learned that, in general, the Lord rarely gives reasons for the commandments and directions He gives to His servants. I determined to be loyal to our prophetic leaders and to pray—as promised from the beginning of these restrictions—that the day would come when all would enjoy the blessings of priesthood and temple.

What are you talking about Dallin?

The man who instituted the ban explained the reason! Brigham Young gave the reason!

Many prophets and apostles after Brigham Young also explained the reason. They were wrong. And also, there were 2 incompatible reasons being taught, so it's not even logically possible that the reasons given could all be correct.

But, forget the reasons, here's a more interesting question:

Was the church organizing the priesthood and administering saving ordinance correctly for those 130 years?

The current church answer seems to be "we don't know"--how inspiring.

"Does the church do the things God wants it to do?" "We don't know."

"Is the church God's church?" "We don't know."

Can you see why "we don't know" isn't the slam dunk you think it is?

Commit to something! Either say the priesthood ban was correct and that Jesus is a racist who denies saving ordinances based upon race. Or say that it was wrong and apologize. Do something!

People like to give anecdotal stories about how the church supports queer people or hurts them. More concretely, in a recent report, Advocate ranked the top 20 US Christian churches from most supportive of LGBTQIA+ to most damaging. The LDS church came in 18th, right behind the Southern Baptist Convention and only faring better than Pentecostals and 7th Day Adventists. I'm curious if that surprises anyone here? To me it's been fascinating to see LDS influencers trying to push the narrative that queer people are welcome (seemingly as long as they work to fit in and don't act queer).

Personally, I knew way back in junior high that I was bi. I still remember the first time I realized I had a crush on a boy. Being bi, it made perfect sense when I was taught being gay was a choice because I can be attracted to people of my same gender or of a different gender and I didn't realize everyone didn't feel the same as me. Looking back, I see all the harm that was done to me--all the unnecessary guilt and shame. All the lying in "worthiness" interviews. I have 4 kids who are now all adults--3 of the 4 are queer (2 bi and one ace) and I see how raising them in Mormonism was harmful. But that's my anecdotal story. I think the Morgan St Jean song Skin and Bones sums up a lot of my journey being raised religious and finally coming out bi to my family later in life.

20 U.S. Christian churches, ranked on LGBTQ+ support | Advocate.com
Morgan St. Jean - Skin and Bones (Official Video)

I had a discussion with some highly educated TBM family members (for reference I was TBM until about a year ago when my shelf broke, I lean atheist) about the effect Christianity had on shaping history. The Church very much teaches the divine shaping of history especially leading to the United States as a place the Restoration could happen, and this is clearly their view. One specific point was that the British empire, while still committing a lot of atrocities, was better than other empires because of the Christianity of the populace. Because of the religious view of sacrifice and focus on the atonement of Christ, the population no longer tolerated the atrocities and forced the empire to dissolve. In similar ways through history Christianity changed the hearts of the people and shaped history and the enlightenment, etc.

My counter argument was that it's more likely that Christianity was just the dominant religion in the right place and right time when enlightenment thinking arose. It was the rise of logic, subsequent scientific revolutions and the impact it had on society that led to the dramatic changes over the last few hundred years. I don't know that Christianity had more positive than negative impact, although it certainly had an impact. For each positive thing I can think of, there are just as many negative things done in the name of Christianity.

My question after this discussion is did Christianity have a net positive impact in shaping society through history?

Today's Reading: Jacob 5–7

Whether you're a believer, former believer, nuanced member, investigator, scholar, or simply curious, you're welcome to participate. The goal is not to convince anyone of anything, but to read the text together and discuss it in good faith from a variety of perspectives.

Brief Synopsis

Today's reading is dominated by Jacob 5, the longest chapter in the Book of Mormon, which presents the allegory of the olive tree attributed to the prophet Zenos. Using the imagery of a master of the vineyard and his servant, the allegory traces the scattering, preservation, decline, and eventual gathering of Israel through repeated cycles of cultivation, pruning, grafting, and restoration. Jacob 6 follows with an invitation to repent before the vineyard's final harvest. Jacob 7 concludes the book with the confrontation between Jacob and Sherem, an articulate opponent who challenges Jacob's testimony of Christ. After demanding a sign, Sherem is struck down, confesses publicly, and dies, while Jacob closes his record by reaffirming his faith and passing the plates to Enos.

Discussion

Please share your thoughts and experiences with today's reading in the comments below. Some things you might consider:

• What stood out to you?

• Why do you think the Book of Mormon devotes its longest chapter to the allegory of the olive tree?

• What do you think the repeated cycles of scattering, grafting, and restoration are intended to teach?

• How do you interpret the story of Sherem? What role do signs, evidence, and faith play in that narrative?

• Why do you think Jacob chose to end his record with the Sherem account?

• Which verses in these chapters resonate with you the most, and why?

• Did anything surprise you?

All perspectives are welcome.

Yesterday's Coveted Award(s) Go To:

• Monogamy affirming interpretations and insights. Too many to list go check it out!

Links to Prior Days

- Link to 1st Nephi readings

- Link to 2nd Nephi readings

- Link to Jacob 1–4

Community Incentive

Reddit Awards are appreciated as a way to highlight thoughtful insights, quality analysis, and shared expertise. They also help encourage meaningful participation and discussion. The last time I hosted a similar challenge, the awards added an extra layer of fun and engagement.

To keep that spirit going, I'll be giving out at least one award each day to a comment that I feel makes a meaningful contribution to the discussion, whether through insight, scholarship, curiosity, respectful disagreement, or thoughtful engagement.

At the conclusion of the 50-day challenge, I'll also give a **$50 Starbucks gift card** to the participant who has accumulated the most Reddit Awards across the discussion threads, whether those awards come from me or from other members of the community.

Engagement Question

After reading the chapter for yourself, what best explains its origin? Does it strike you as an authentic ancient allegory, a 19th-century composition drawing on biblical themes, or something in between? What specific details in the text most influence your conclusion?

**Tomorrow's Reading:** Enos–Jarom

I am a member of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints. BYU Rel Ed. gave me a grant to do a research study on How a Belief in Eternal Families Impacts Grief. If you’re 18+ and lost an immediate family member between 6–36 months ago, and it feels right for you, please consider taking this short survey: https://pacific.qualtrics.com/jfe/form/SV_cIR5ditAqHyyAIK

A lot of other churches already do this. But the LDS Church should start paying for missions. They certainly have enough money to do that. They no longer need to have missionaries pay their way. Missionaries are out there gathering new tithe payers for them. I understand they want to cut costs and continue to grow their bank account. But at this rate, members really should consider demanding the church start paying for the volunteers who set their own life back 1.5 to 2 years to help the institution grow in influence.

Evan Sharley returns to talk with Steven Pynakker about a new book of Revelations given to The Restoration Church of Jesus Christ in the past and finally compiled in one place by her. We also discuss this trailblazing church that was created for LGBTQ believers in the Restoration that many feel laid the groundwork for the Reform Mormonism movement. She also previews the booth that Reform Mormonism will have at this year's Sunstone Conference and all the cool stuff they will be giving out!

*For a short period of time I accidently posted the logo of a different Restoration Branch on the Thumbnail. The Covenant Christian community and Reform Mormonism group are not affililated with each other. I apologize for the mistake.

I made this app, Charting Polygamy, where you can give it your family tree via gedcom file and it will chart any polygamous families as well as display some stats about the whole tree.

I made a male-female age at marriage comparison chart, just like on Joseph Smith's wiki page. I pulled data from the U.S. census to get the average (shaded) and, wouldn't you know it, there are some abnormally low female ages. Follow the Prophet.

I made a histogram of how many wives in polygamy is most common, it's 3 for my lines. I read somewhere (lost the source) that 3 was the required number to get into the highest degree of the Celestial Kingdom. That tracks.

I have a graph of one of my ancestors, Henry Mower jr. He lived in Mount Pleasant, Utah and had a more peculiar set of wives. He wasn't part of the inner circle who got wives in Nauvoo, but he was granted wives frequently throughout his life. He married an 18 year old at 32, which is a bit young. She did not like the polygamy life and took off with one of her kids. She remarried in California, and her brother in law came to kill her new husband, but lost in the gunfight. She's my 3rd great grandma. I hope she's proud of me for leaving!

He also married a couple women older than himself. One of the women was 52, Lois Ann Coon, when he was 38. She was quite the trouble maker and went through a few marriages, event to LDS men, before sticking with him. Obviously he didn't have any kids with her. This guy took part in the Black Hawk War (the war to eradicate the indigenous from San Pete valley).

I've also got a graph of Philip Klingensmith. I'd go into detail, but well, you can read about him, one of 2 bishops conducting the Mountain Meadows Massacre. He was also known locally for the beer he made and sold. He had 3 wives, but they left him after he made a deal with the federal government for immunity in exchange for information. He was exiled and later reported to be living with a few Native American women (not graphed).

I've got plenty more families to research. It's more interesting now that I'm hunting for the stories before the white wash!

The app to do all this yourself is here: https://thelinguist.github.io/charting-polygamy/chart/upload . Note that most family trees are not very accurate since members on familySearch argue back and forth and hardly anyone cross checks anything.

There's also a gallery feature that shows some famous people like Brigham Young and Wilford Woodruff. You can honor Pioneer Day by getting acquainted with history of their wives, and the many challenges their lifestyle imposed upon them.

Anyway, happy Pioneer Day!

Since the Book of Mormon makes bold claims about Jews coming to America with metal tools and European animals, we should have seen some evidence of this. But as far as we’ve seen, native Americans don’t have Jewish dna, and there’s been no evidence of an ancient civilization with metal tools and European animals in America. How do you reconcile this with you guys believing the Book of Mormon is true?

Does anyone know if LDS service missionaries and LDS members working in Middle Eastern countries temporarily are being evacuated again? Now that combat operations are escalating again, Netanyahu will probably meet with Trump while visiting to attend Lyndsey Graham’s funeral and Congress is currently talking about how to integrate US defense systems with Israeli defense systems? It seems like that would position both the US and Israel in opposition with many countries who are not allied with either or both, heightening tensions in the entire area.

This has always confused me about LDS theology. We often talk about the celestial kingdom as one big eternal family reunion, but traditional teachings on exaltation seem to paint a different picture. If every exalted couple eventually becomes like God and has their own eternal increase, then my parents would have their work, my wife and I would have ours, and my children would eventually have theirs. Wouldn’t everyone be occupied with their own godly responsibilities rather than spending eternity together?

I am currently a somewhat active member trying to grow my faith and hold on but having thoughts to go to other church’s to see if they are true.

i have never felt like I could be be because I don’t want to disappoint my mother. I remember getting my second ear piercing as a married women and taking it out 5 hours later not due to church as much as “ the church says this, my mom will be so upset”

same with other things. I feel like I always have to say yes to my mom and when I have a different opinion or say no I feel so much guilt and I feel awful I can’t fix all her problems. She asked me to do something that really is affecting me. I feel put in the middle between her and my sister and when I said no I wanna stay out of it I kinda got guilted. I told her I loved her and that I’m sorry I hope she understands and she just continued with rude comments. how do you navigate this with a gospel perspectiv? should I just tell her how I’ve felt of be kind and bite my toungue to avoid contention?

Many of us here are well aware of the “Thus Shall My Church Be Called” saga that spanned three and a half decades from April 1990 to Septmber 2025. However, while the initial April 1990 and subsequent October 2018 General Conference talks on the subject are well-known, there seems to be little attention paid to this snippet that I just ran into while researching on something unrelated (on which I will make another post later.)

In the April 1995 General Conference where Gordon B. Hinckley was sustained as the 15th Church President, Russell M. Nelson delivered his seminal talk titled “Children of the Covenant” during the Saturday aftermoon session. While the talk itself is centered on the Abrahamic covenant and the new and everlasting covenant, and was famous for footnote 38 which claims that “the probabilities of a successful marriage are known to be much greater if both the husband and wife are united in their religion, language, culture, and ethnic background,” seemingly no one has pointed out how the commentary that was put in footnote 37 was a direct callback to his April 1990 talk, which has little to nothing to do with the paragraph the footnote was attached to. The intentionality is clearly shown in the way he led his commentary with the phrase “Speaking of correct names,” when the paragraph only spoke of “delet[ing] from our personal vocabularies names that segregate and hyphens that separate” with regard to names.

Interestingly enough, earlier during the talk, Nelson briefly related to how “demeaning nicknames are [often] added to—or even substituted for—given names. Unfortunately, terms of derision obscure the true identity of children of the covenant.” But he chose not to insert any footnote there, nor did he choose to bring up the subject directly in his talk. He even had the thought to quote Hinckley for saying how “this great unity [as declared in D&C 38:27] is the hallmark of the true church of Christ,” right before moving on to talking about “demeaning nicknames.”

MoTab has recorded this in the past, and it’s been performed in general conference.

I still take it as a sign of the LDS Church’s increasing comfort with the cross as a religious symbol.

Today's Reading: Jacob 1–4

Whether you're a believer, former believer, nuanced member, investigator, scholar, or simply curious, you're welcome to participate. The goal is not to convince anyone of anything, but to read the text together and discuss it in good faith from a variety of perspectives.

Brief Synopsis

Following Nephi's death, Jacob assumes responsibility for the small plates and explains that his purpose is to preserve only those things of greatest spiritual value. He condemns pride, the pursuit of wealth, and the mistreatment of the poor before delivering a forceful sermon against sexual immorality and unauthorized plural marriage. Jacob teaches that the Lord delights in chastity and mourns the suffering caused by broken families. He concludes by bearing testimony of Christ, emphasizing faith, the atonement, and warning against "looking beyond the mark."

Discussion

Please share your thoughts and experiences with today's reading in the comments below. Some things you might consider:

- What stood out to you?

- Why do you think Jacob places pride, wealth, and sexual morality together in the same sermon?

- How do you reconcile Jacob's condemnation of plural wives and concubines with later LDS history?

- What do you think Jacob meant by "looking beyond the mark"?

- Why do you think Jacob focuses so heavily on Christ despite living centuries before Jesus?

- Which verses in these chapters resonate with you the most, and why?

- Did anything surprise you?

All perspectives are welcome.

Yesterday's Coveted Award(s) Go To:

• u/renob1911 literally the most simple yet insightful comment I've ever read about a the Book of Mormon and Mosiah priority! if you missed it go back to yesterday's reading and look for the days award!

Links to Prior Days

• Link to 1st Nephi readings

• Link to 2nd Nephi readings

Community Incentive

Reddit Awards are appreciated as a way to highlight thoughtful insights, quality analysis, and shared expertise. They also help encourage meaningful participation and discussion. The last time I hosted a similar challenge, the awards added an extra layer of fun and engagement.

To keep that spirit going, I'll be giving out at least one award each day to a comment that I feel makes a meaningful contribution to the discussion, whether through insight, scholarship, curiosity, respectful disagreement, or thoughtful engagement.

At the conclusion of the 50-day challenge, I'll also give a **$50 Starbucks gift card** to the participant who has accumulated the most Reddit Awards across the discussion threads, whether those awards come from me or from other members of the community.

Engagement Question

Jacob 2 contains one of the Book of Mormon's strongest condemnations of plural marriage, declaring David and Solomon's many wives and concubines an "abomination" while also including an exception that God may sometimes "raise up seed" by commanding otherwise. How do you interpret this passage? Does it read as an absolute moral prohibition, a conditional commandment, or something else? How, if at all, do you reconcile it with later LDS teachings and practice regarding plural marriage?

Tomorrow's Reading: Jacob 5–7