Lucifer's Lantern

   In 1980, Ezra Taft Benson delivered a devotional at BYU that outlined what he called the “ 14 Fundamentals in Following the Prophet. ” The message spread widely within the church and shaped how Latter day Saints came to understand prophetic authority. Even if someone never read the original talk, the ideas appeared in lessons, leadership trainings, and casual conversation across generations. The fundamentals build a system that places the prophet above every competing source of guidance. When read together, they create a model of obedience and hierarchy that rests on the idea that one man speaks for God. 1. The prophet is the only person who speaks for God in everything  This first principle elevates one individual above all other voices. If only one man speaks for God, then any disagreement with him becomes a spiritual issue rather than a difference in interpretation. The structure relies on absolute trust in a single leader. 2. The living prophet is more important than script...

This series looks back at how early critics of the church reacted to the rise of Mormonism. Some mocked it, others warned against it, and a few tried to make sense of it. Each post features a historical excerpt and some quick context to show how critics viewed the new faith as it was unfolding. Part 1 can be read here In 1830 a man by the name of Abner Cole published a criticism of Joseph Smith called the Book of Pukei in the Palmyra Reflector, published under the name "Obadiah Dogberry Esquire".   Cole had access to Grandin’s print shop and saw early pages of the Book of Mormon before the public did. His reaction took the form of a mock scripture that rewrote Joseph Smith’s story into a  joke. That choice wasn’t random. He was simply recounting the events surrounding Joseph smith in a pseudobiblical style, Cole shows us that he likely recognized the Book of Mormon as part of that same genre. Events Parodied in The Book of Pukei     1. Angel Moroni – Cole rewr...

The First Presidency released a formal statement this week addressing the use of artificial intelligence among members. The letter expresses concern that digital tools have already weakened personal testimony across the church, and that AI may increase the problem if members are not “spiritually careful” with how they use it. According to the statement, leaders have watched a steady rise in faith crises that begin online. The document points to search engines, forums, and social media as the primary sources. AI is now categorized as “the next major risk,” since it can provide quick, direct answers that bypass official materials and approved explanations. To counter this, members are encouraged to use AI only for what the letter calls “uplifting and faith supporting inquiry.” The statement defines this as asking questions that reinforce existing beliefs, assist in preparing devotionals, or help explain doctrines in a positive light. Leaders warn against asking AI anything related to hi...

In 2012, Jeremy Runnells was struggling with questions about LDS history that he couldn’t reconcile with what he had learned growing up. He had served a mission, gone to BYU, and lived his life inside of Mormonism, but the sources he was reading didn’t line up with the version he’d been taught. When he spoke with a Church Educational System director about it, he was asked to write his concerns in one place so they could review them together. He sat down and did exactly that. He pulled notes, checked references, and laid out the issues in a document that ended up more than eighty pages long. He sent it back expecting a follow-up. The follow-up never came. That unanswered list of questions eventually became known online as the CES Letter. In April 2013, he shared his document to reddit on r/exmormon under the title “Letter to a CES Director.” The file spread fast because it pulled together problems that members usually encounter one at a time. Runnells later said he wrote it to underst...

I felt closer to God when I finally stopped believing in Him.  Let me explain. When I was a kid, I’d sit in church and listen to people talk about God as if he was real . I say “he” because God was also defined as a male, and that definition supposedly came from thousands of years of tradition. God was like me : he had feelings or grief and joy; he wanted me to be happy; he had ambition and plans for me, just like I did for myself. What a wonderful thought that a Supreme Being had me in mind! But God was also “He.” I say that because the title implied a king, nobility, and sovereignty. God was not like me : He was omnipotent; He knew better than me; He was always in control; He wasn’t flawed like me; He didn’t make mistakes; He knew the end from the beginning. I couldn’t ultimately know God, but He wanted me to draw close to Him. It's called "the House of the Lord" for a reason, right?   According to the traditions I grew up in, the way we approached God was through “ri...

When you grow up or live inside a system where your sexuality is treated like community property, you end up believing that your body, your desires, and even your curiosity belong to someone else’s judgment. It hits some people early. For others, it doesn’t click until years later, long after sitting in a small office across from a church leader asking questions no one should’ve asked in the first place. And it’s not just teenagers. Adults get caught in the same pattern, feeling obligated to confess things that should’ve stayed personal. I need you to understand this...   Your sex life is nobody’s business .  It's most certainly not the business of the  man holding a calling that makes him your “judge in Israel.” Turning your sexuality into something that needs review and approval doesn’t build integrity. It builds a culture where you learn to monitor yourself through someone else’s expectations. You stop listening to your own sense of right and wrong and start waiting f...