- RLD on New Program Fatigue in the Church: “Different things work for different people, and the one advantage I see of having a succession of new programs that are soon mostly forgotten is that people can latch onto the ones that work for them. But overall I agree that fewer programs with more sustained attention will bring (somewhat) better results. The example that comes to my mind is the way the Church as an institution responded to President Benson’s call to focus on the Book of Mormon. It was relentless, and it made a difference.” Feb 28, 00:44
- on Unbinding Isaac: Aaron Koller on the Trauma and Theology of Genesis 22: “The Akedah starts with God’s command that Abraham sacrifice “thine only son Isaac, whom thou lovest” and ends with God commending Abraham because “thou hast not withheld thy son, thine only son from me.” It’s all about the potential loss of Isaac. There’s not a word about Abraham suspending his ethics or being willing to kill just because the Lord said so. How can this not be about ethics or killing? In the culture of Abraham’s day, children were the property of their father (as was their mother) to be disposed of as the father saw fit. If he wants to send them out into the wilderness to die (i.e. Hagar and Ishmael), he can do that. If he wants to sacrifice them to his God, that’s his choice. It’s a waste of valuable resources, but it’s not particularly “wrong.” We can and should find this abhorrent, but that shouldn’t prevent us from heeding the intended message of the Akedah, which is that we must be prepared to sacrifice even what is most precious to us if the Lord so commands. We also shouldn’t read into it a message that wasn’t intended just because what Abraham was asked to do is completely unethical in our culture (and rightly so). If anyone thinks the Lord is asking them to do something that’s wrong, the relevant Abraham story is his conversation with the Lord about Sodom and Gomorrah, not the Akedah. In that story the Lord has absolutely no objection to Abraham insisting on his own ethical judgement, or to his claim that God himself must “do right.” Similarly, we can and should be appalled that Lot was willing to sacrifice his daughters to protect the angels who were under his roof, but that should not prevent us from heeding the intended message: that we have a duty to protect strangers and foreigners even if our society turns on them. We also learn that dire consequences follow when a society turns on the foreigners among them. (Yes, the duty to guests is part of the story of Lot, but the angels are not Lot’s guests when he pleads with them to shelter under his roof, perhaps hoping that giving them the status of guests would protect them.)” Feb 28, 00:29
- on New Program Fatigue in the Church: “It is also worth considering, I think, that divine revelation might not always be a way in which new ideas or truths are presented. Revelation might be a directive to hold onto old or received ideas and truths that are currently besieged and are slipping away in the general society.” Feb 27, 11:53
- on New Program Fatigue in the Church: “REC911, I understand where you are coming from. If the President of the Church receives a revelation (such as in his Prophet role), it is through his President of the Church role that he implements it among the members. But whether he receives revelation or not, he is still the President of the Church and has to make decisions. Elder Stephen L. Richards said it this way in his April 1932 general conference address: “The Church believes in new and continuous revelation, and ever holds itself in readiness to receive messages from the Lord. To that end the people sustain the President in particular, and others of the General Authorities, as the media through which God’s word may be delivered. A revelation to our living president would be as readily accepted and become as much a part of our scripture as the revelations given to the Prophet Joseph. “In the absence of direct communication from heaven, however, the Church and its people must be guided by the revelations already given and the wisdom and inspiration of its leadership. I have great confidence in the wisdom of the presiding authorities in all departments of church service, first, because they hold the Holy Priesthood, and second, because I know them to be good men. There is virtue in the endowment of the Priesthood. It brings to men who receive it and appreciate it an enlarged conception of iife and an altruism that is Christlike in character. It brings spiritual knowledge and power, and the judgment of a presiding officer holding the Priesthood is generally an inspired judgment. It is the product of noble motive and fervent prayer.”” Feb 27, 07:40
- on New Program Fatigue in the Church: “Brother Green, I am not saying you or other members have not heard any prophecy, I am saying I have not. I am happy for you and others that feel God wanted the 2 hour block etc. Took Him a while as I have been hearing about that for 30 years. Now I am hearing about a 1 hour church…. There is a reason they have two titles. President and Prophet are not the same things. I am guessing most members think all of Nelson’s changes were from the prophet side, but I think they were on the president side. I dont need them all to be on the prophet side to be a believer in the gospel. I am following (mostly) the president and you are following the prophet. It works for both of us.” Feb 27, 06:18
- on New Program Fatigue in the Church: “Ron Yorgason: Good point. I guess it comes down to whether the Mormon corridor birth rate is more predictive of the eventual missionary cohort or the baby blessing cohort is. From where I am at least it still seems like the Mormon Corridor missionaries are still very much the core of the proselytizing force, but then of course Mormon corridor birth rate is probably also affected by there simply being fewer Latter-day Saints per capita, and maybe the Latter-day Saint, Mormon corridor birth rate didn’t collapse in 2008. To make it more concrete, I’m going to say that if we don’t start to see a consistent year-by-year decline by 2030 then yours is probably the more correct way to approach the numbers. Whatever the case, I hope you’re right!” Feb 27, 04:31
- on New Program Fatigue in the Church: “Stephen C, I was directed to your Sept 19, 2025 article here, “Missionary Numbers are Peaking and Will Start to Decline.” I’d comment there, but it has already turned off. Your projections on missionary numbers are wrong. Instead of peaking, we’re at kind of a low spot and about to see a massive spike that will keep missionary numbers in the 95-107k range from 2027-2033. While the national and state birth rate did indeed tumble from around 14 babies per 1000 people from 1995-2008, to the 10-12 we’re seeing now, 2008 actually saw a massive spike in LDS babies blessed. It jumped from 93k in 2007 to 123k in 2008! Here are the numbers: YEAR BIRTHS 2005 93,150 2006 94,006 2007 93,698 2008 123,502 2009 119,722 2010 120,528 2011 119,917 2012 122,273 2013 115,486 2014 116,409 2015 114,550 2016 109,246 2017 106,771 2018 102,102 2019 94,266 2020 51,819 2021 89,069 2022 89,059 2023 93,594 2024 91,617 We’ve been seeing about 39-44% of the babies blessed in the church go on to serve missions. But the last couple years there’s been extra hype from leaders and the new age drop for women, it might go as high as 46% for a couple years. Here’s the projection for 44%: 2025 82,590 2026 95,568 2027 107,019 2028 105,710 2029 105,796 2030 106,564 2031 104,614 2032 102,034 2033 101,622 2034 98,470 2035 95,047 2036 91,904 2037 86,402 2038 64,277 Here’s the projection for 39% 2025 73,205 2026 84,708 2027 94,857 2028 93,698 2029 93,774 2030 94,454 2031 92,726 2032 90,439 2033 90,074 2034 87,280 2035 84,247 2036 81,460 2037 76,584 2038 56,973 So, I think we can expect to see between 95k-107k missionaries by 2027, and it will stay there until 2033.” Feb 26, 22:26
- on New Program Fatigue in the Church: “My biggest concern with the way these new programs are sometimes discussed is the tendency to act as though they introduce principles that never existed before. At times it feels like a kind of institutional amnesia. Take Come, Follow Me, for example. The Church has consistently taught the importance of personal and family scripture study. The primary change wasn’t the introduction of a new principle, but the standardization and alignment of lesson themes to better support home-centered learning. Similarly, Ministering didn’t invent the idea that meaningful contact is more important than simply delivering a lesson. That principle had long been emphasized; the program reframed and streamlined how it was applied. And finally, missionaries have always been taught to teach by the Spirit. That emphasis didn’t suddenly appear in recent updates—it has been foundational for generations. Recognizing continuity alongside change doesn’t diminish the value of new initiatives. In many cases, what we’re seeing is refinement and renewed emphasis, not the creation of entirely new doctrines or principles.” Feb 26, 18:58
- on What Did Church Lead You to Think About Yesterday, 2/22?: “Kent, sorry for the misunderstanding. I meant that it was an outstanding talk that many more people should have heard.” Feb 26, 18:47
