Censorship of GC has begun…..

Interesting. I do believe God loves us whether or not we deserve it because he loves all of us. The real surprise is that Pres. Uchtdorf’s talk hasn’t been edited.

One can feel he or she doesn’t deserve God’s love, even though in reality he or she does. I believe many people find themselves in this situation when they have sinned, especially serious sin. They don’t believe God could ever love them because of what they have done. I also believe that some people don’t feel that God loves them because they have not had experiences where they felt God’s love, or have not recognized God’s love.

I suppose if one’s view of God is more like the Old Testament God as opposed to the New Testament God, one could actually believe that there are people that really don’t deserve God’s love. I would think (though I do not have data to support this) that many people might think Adolf Hitler, for instance, does not deserve God’s love.

That said, I don’t really think Pres. Monson nor Elder Holland meant to indicate that there are people who don’t deserve God’s love, I do think they meant it the way it has been edited to read – but I don’t know that for sure.

In the interest of full disclosure, my own view of God’s love is not necessarily individualized love. I do believe “God loves us so he sent his son,” I do not believe God necessarily expresses love to individuals (although he may do so to some individuals).

The speakers regularly go back and compare what they prepared to what they said, and small wording changes happen quite regularly after the fact. I do the exact same thing when I summarize my Sunday School lessons here. I record my memory of what I said, and, in some cases, add details I meant to include but forgot.

I believe strongly it is an over-reaction to call this “censorship” and “blowback” – and I am quite positive the speakers would not allow anyone in the PR Dept. to edit their talks. I can’t say that strongly enough. Neither Pres. Monson nor Elder Holland would allow that to happen.

I know people here are sensitive to anything that might be a negative, but, as kindly as I can put this, over-sensitivity can border on paranoia – and this is a borderline example. It. Happens. All. The. Time.

Finally, the print version is better than the original version, so I choose to believe the print version is what Pres. Monson either meant to say or wanted to have in print – and Elder Holland’s reference was altered to match Pres. Monson’s desire.

To be undeserving of God’s love is an impossibility, it cannot happen

This simple interpretation speaks to me.

What kind of blowback?

There is a lot of talk on other less friendly internet discussion boards about how Pres Monson said God will love us even if we don’t deserve it. This implies that some people don’t deserve God’s love. No other way to interpret it.

So Ray, or anybody else, give us an explanation of how Pres Monson could have misread his talk, or made a typo, and then Holland misread his also, or made the same typo?

Like someone said already, any speaker can change what is published if they feel like it. I don’t think it means anything and using the word “censorship” is hyperbole, big time. If I remember correctly, I think a patriarch can change the wording in a patriarchal blessing as he is transcribing it if he feels so inspired. Pres. Monson changing his talk is pretty much the same thing. I think it was a good change.

Oh and I hate Sheldon (the tv character), he bugs me.

I don’t think it means anything and using the word “censorship” is hyperbole, big time.

Ok, you are correct and I was wrong to use the word censorship. A better title would have been “Correlation of GC talks begin” or something like that. But I don’t for a minute believe that TSM decided to change the talk all on his own. I believe somebody in the church that is monitoring social media saw chatter about his use of words, and told him about it.

Yeah, I think you may have a point there. Maybe the church is getting more responsive to the voice of social media.