- This topic is empty.
-
Posts
-
Not sure if anyone heard Pres. Nelson’s BYU Devotional Talk https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TbfU8Trdu9I . Ummm . . . I guess I liked that he said everyone could know the truth for themselves and urged people to get their own witness of whether what he said was true.This talked begged so many questions for me. The November 2015 Policy was downplayed from a revelation (which he said it was) to a policy aimed at solving a problem (the problem solving was mandated from the Lord as divine law). The reversal was part of the continued effort to work on the problem. The problem solving changed but the mandate did not. But if the whole point of the talk was that divine law doesn’t change and that our Church leaders are the source of truth, doesn’t this example contradict either or both? Either God changed his mind (divine law changes) or the leaders got it wrong and had to change course. Also, there are so many examples of what was taught as divine law changing (priesthood ban, oral sex ban, birth control ban, etc.).
My read of Gen Z is that most have a good nose for spin and I would guess this is going to cause more doubts than it will fix, but people like me may not be the intended audience. I would have responded so much better to a message that was real and vulnerable. I wish he would have said:
“We get revelation like you do, we do our best and are sincere, but sometimes we get it wrong. We got it wrong with the November 2015 and it hurt people and we are sorry. We are going to try to do better and ask for your forgiveness and prayers. Ultimately, it is your job to pray about what we say and get a witness for yourselves. Some of you felt like you got answers on the 2015 Policy. We are listening the great questions you are asking and are excited to keep progressing as a Church. You are the future of the Church and you are the Church.”
It was… disheartening. A very high level view of the five truths discussed:
1) We are children of god. We are a chosen generation reserved for the climatic battle taking place between good and evil today. Speculation that in the preexistence we all promised to defend the gospel during “this world’s tumultuous winding up scenes.” This feels manipulative. “You promised to defend the gospel but…”
2) Truth is truth. Truth isn’t relative. Truth can’t be altered by the opinions of men. God decides what is truth, not peers, not google, and “certainly not those that are disaffected from the church.”
3) God loves us with a perfect love. “There is a strong connection between god’s love and his laws.” Here Nelson revisits the well worn roads of Mormonism’s teaching that blessings are dependent on our obedience.
4) God appoints prophets and apostles to communicate his love and his laws. This is where the devotional derails and reveals what I believe to be the point of the devotional. I’ll slow down here:
a) “Our commission as apostles is to teach nothing but truth. That commission does not give us the authority to modify divine law. For example, lets consider the definition of marriage…”
b) “Requirements to enter the temple have not changed.” Uh…
hawkgrrrl has a postc) The POX was to defuse tensions that could arise between LGBT parents and their children. The intent was to avoid pitting children against parents and vice versa.
This implies much more than what was satated directly. If a LGBT+ parent is pitted against a child that wants to join the church, wouldn’t that mean that the expectation of all church members is to be “pitted against” LGBT+? Christofferson said it was okay for members to support gay marriage. Is it okay for members to embrace gay marriage or is the expectation that members would be “pitted against” such things?
d) Nelson makes it sound like big, bad, old meanie god laid down his law/truth, it hurt people, but Nelson interceded on behalf of all of us and pled with god to show us some mercy. tommy_lee_jones_newspaper.jpg
e) “We care deeply about every child of god regardless of age, personal circumstances, gender, sexual orientation, or other unique challenges.” Age, personal circumstances, gender, and sexual orientation are only “challenges” because
wemake them challenges for each other. 5) The spirit testifies of truth. Ask to seek a confirmation from the spirit that the things Nelson has said are true and from god.
Nelson gives a blessing that people will be able to discern between the laws of god and the “conflicting voices of the world.” This too feels very manipulative to me. There’s a clear implication of what is true and what is false, only one outcome that the spirit will testify to, namely what Nelson has said during the devotional.
nibbler wrote:
It was… disheartening.Yeah. It hurts. I like President Nelson, but there are just some things he says that bother me a lot.
I really did not like the devotional. It seemed to me like saying the church is true because the church leaders say so and the world is always wrong. I didn’t like how it seemed dismissive of concerns, especially those “disaffected from the church”. I feel like those who trust the church leadership got nothing but confirmation of their views, and those like me remained unconvinced. So I’m not really sure what the message was supposed to accomplish. Honestly, I’ve been having a really hard time as a BYU student going through a faith crisis and this was definitely not the message I needed to hear. The devotional was one more thing that makes me feel like I just don’t belong anymore.
I also didn’t like his part about how things always work because they are divine laws. What about those of us who find that covenants, prayer, missions, etc don’t work for us? Even with his heart surgery example, there may be underlying laws that don’t change, but not every heart surgery is successful. It doesn’t always work. There are random factors that change things. And humans are often wrong about what those laws are. I feel very marginalized whenever I hear that the gospel always works for everyone.
As for the definition of marriage, well maybe God’s definition of marriage hasn’t changed, but what is that definition exactly? It’s pretty clear the modern church’s definition of marriage is quite different from, say, Brigham Young’s.
Overall, I feel like the message was tailored for the regular believers, not for people like me. It makes sense, focusing on the majority audience, but it negatively affects people like me on the margins.
I can’t say I’m greatly disappointed only because I didn’t have high hopes for the devotional to begin with. Near the beginning Nelson uses the Kimball quote, “If men are really humble, they will realize that they discover, but do not create, truth,” but the actual message was almost completely devoid of humility. There were plenty of opportunities for it. But saying prophets ALWAYS teach the truth? Or that what he believes are divine laws will ALWAYS work, even when people find it doesn’t? There was opportunity for humility in his explanation for the November 15 policy. I can try to believe that it came from a place of love and concern. And I can believe that they were grieved when they saw how it affected people. He seemed so close to saying that they realized the policy was misguided, but he backed away before getting there. Their “supplication to the Lord continued” until they “felt directed to adjust the policy.” It COULD mean that they received better understanding, realized their mistake, and sought to make it right, but as nibbler said, it sounded more like he thought the original policy was from God but he was able to ask God to water it down for us. When it comes down to it, his invitation to the devotional said he thinks about issues that concern young adults today, but he seems completely blind to the concern for humility and authenticity.
My answer today: Make a pan of Count Chocula Marshmallow mash.
Each it with your fingers until you feel sick.
Bike in the pouring rain for 40 minutes.
Listen to Lauren Daigle.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sIaT8Jl2zpI That’s all I got.
Exactly what Katzpur said, word-for-word. Disheartening is a good word for it, but like Hazy said I didn’t have high expectations to begin with and therefore got what I expected. I do appreciate that he used LGBT and the words gay and lesbian and did not use “same sex attraction.” I think that’s a step forward on the part of a major church leader.
I think the most disheartening part for me was that it seemed every time he said something I liked, he immediately qualified with something I didn’t necessarily agree with. [The following are not actual quotes – not what he said, but what I heard] “We are all literal sons and daughters of God!”
:thumbup: “You are a chosen generation.”:thumbdown: “Seek truth and to know for yourself.”:thumbup: “Those who have left the church don’t know the truth.”:thumbdown: “God loves us all unconditionally.”:thumbup: “You really only get God’s love if you keep all the commandments.”:thumbdown: [You get the idea.] I don’t believe this is the message the generation(s) he was speaking to needs to hear or wants. In my text messaging with one of my children who was present I used the word platitudes, and I think that’s mostly what it was. Millennials and Gen. Z (or Gen. X for that matter) are not great consumers of platitudes in my experience.The one other thought that occurred to me while listening was something Nibbler already pointed out. When Pres. Nelson was talking about their commission as apostles, my thought was it was my belief he was to “speak nothing but repentance unto this generation.” I’ll stop now before I become overly critical of something that really wasn’t directed at me anyway.
Like Katzpur and Curt
Quote:I like President Nelson, but there are just some things he says that bother me a lot.
On a more positive note, he didn’t let Wendy speak.
:clap: DarkJedi wrote:
On a more positive note, he didn’t let Wendy speak.:clap:
😆 I was watching the devotional in real time and it seemed like a standard talk until President Nelson got to the discussion of the November policy. It got my attention and by the time he was done I said to myself, “Oh boy! There are going to be some mad people out there.” However, Pres Nelson wasn’t speaking to that particular group (I’m not sure anything he said would change some minds). He was speaking to the faithful (many of whom won’t even know what he’s talking about…they just haven’t tracked that particular issue) or the somewhat wavering (who are aware of the issue, still faithful but troubled). I suppose time will tell what the ultimate impact will be.
But hey, at least it wasn’t boring!
I think I’ve come to realize I just don’t really care much for Nelson’s version of the gospel. It’s a version where God’s love is conditional, obedience is of supreme importance, and prophets always tell the truth. It’s just not very applicable. Too bad because I really like him as a person, just not the way he interprets and applies the gospel in his own life and subsequently what he presents as the absolute “truth” to members. Other prophets and apostles have presented a better version. nibbler wrote:
4) God appoints prophets and apostles to communicate his love and his laws. This is where the devotional derails and reveals what I believe to be the point of the devotional. I’ll slow down here:a) “Our commission as apostles is to teach nothing but truth.
That may be their commission…it doesn’t mean they always get it right (Nov Policy).My personal experience has led me to believe I am to learn that I should not put my faith in the arm of flesh. Prophets and apostles are called to depart truth when they can, and I can appreciate their best efforts, and when taken with a grain of salt, find nuggets of truth to help me here and there in a truly buffet style.
Receiving guidance from inspired sources is always appreciated.
Sometimes fortune cookies also inspire me.
I have recently become a student of metaphysical spirituality. In that realm they talk about a Great Divine and how it is more Sourced within us than we realize. One of the points of understanding comes in the idea of wrestling with something. When you are wrestling, you are not accepting or receiving what Source/God/Divinity is giving you. Russell Nelson, and perhaps others, are wrestling with how to love. God has sent people to share love with. Russell isn’t comfortable with it. Not because he means to. But because he was taught a barrier filled love. There could be myriad reasons for this. Everything from stuff you are directly taught and chose to believe, to being in environments that deeply affect you – such as parents who drink. (Was alcoholism a part of his life experience with his parents?) Internally this war is constantly waging. On our end we get to watch him wrestle with it publicly.
For us, the double struggle comes from watching believers just take in the message, no matter what. We get to wrestle with them. Even if we walk away, we are still wrestling. Walking away is part of the wrestle. It’s on our mind, we try to cover it, forget it, disengage. We may even succeed for a while – but it will come back. When and how we don’t know.
Our only recourse is to learn to apply forgiveness. That is tough.
Wishing us all success.
DarkJedi wrote:
I think the most disheartening part for me was that it seemed every time he said something I liked, he immediately qualified with something I didn’t necessarily agree with. [The following are not actual quotes – not what he said, but what I heard] “We are all literal sons and daughters of God!”:thumbup: “You are a chosen generation.”:thumbdown: “Seek truth and to know for yourself.”:thumbup: “Those who have left the church don’t know the truth.”:thumbdown: “God loves us all unconditionally.”:thumbup: “You really only get God’s love if you keep all the commandments.”:thumbdown: [You get the idea.]I have avoided most GA talks of late because of the whiplash evident within the talks themselves and between individual speakers. It is exhausting. For my own mental and spiritual health, I have elected (for now) to not listen to GA talks anymore. Where I cannot physically avoid them (by leaving the room) then I will check out mentally.
I believe these men are doing what they think is right. I believe that they truly believe they want the best for us. They believe they are spreading the “good word” and doing good things. All these things may be true, but I need a time out. I’m going to try the direct communication with God method of spirituality for a while and see how that goes.
mom3 wrote:
Russell Nelson, and perhaps others, are wrestling with how to love. God has sent people to share love with. Russell isn’t comfortable with it. Not because he means to. But because he was taught a barrier filled love. There could be myriad reasons for this. Everything from stuff you are directly taught and chose to believe, to being in environments that deeply affect you – such as parents who drink. (Was alcoholism a part of his life experience with his parents?) Internally this war is constantly waging. On our end we get to watch him wrestle with it publicly.For us, the double struggle comes from watching believers just take in the message, no matter what. We get to wrestle with them. Even if we walk away, we are still wrestling. Walking away is part of the wrestle. It’s on our mind, we try to cover it, forget it, disengage. We may even succeed for a while – but it will come back. When and how we don’t know.
I love and appreciate this more than words can express. Thank you for sharing.
I am listening to this trying to understand the framework of President Nelson’s address. he gets to the part about God’s laws are motivated by love. He gives the example of parents trying to protect children by having household rules. I am confused however about the example of the heart surgery and the “laws” that govern the heart beating or not. I feel that this muddies the waters. Are God’s commandments to us the same as the laws of physics? How are the rules a family puts in place to protect children similar to the law of gravity? I really feel like we are talking about different things here and I find it unhelpful to generalize between them.
Quote:“It always works!”
This quote shook me and is a perfect illustration of my problem. What always works? the law of gravity always works? Sure, that is easy to test and replicate? Do family rules designed to keep children safe always keep children safe? No, and it is not always the fault of the parent or the child when something goes wrong? What about the rule that “if you ask God with real intent he will reveal the truth of it unto you”? Is that part of God’s law? Does it always work? What about living as a dutiful lifelong Mormon? Does that always lead to happiness and exaltation in the next life? Unknown and requiring faith.
I feel that conflating God’s law with natural law is incorrect and unhelpful … unless … you want to give the impression that spiritual laws are just as regular and dependable as the laws that govern electricity. Do this, get that. Quid pro quo. I understand the allure of just this sort of vending machine/formula gospel. This is personal for me because I did believe in that and I was shocked when it blew up in my face.
Question. How much responsibility or duty does the leader of an organization have to represent likely outcomes, probabilities, and risks to the best of their ability? How much does an individual leader’s honest belief and optimism for a positive outcome temper that responsibility or duty? How much should puffery or hyperbole is allowed.
When President Nelson says “It always works!” is he just talking about restarting the human heart? Is he being completely honest and transparent? Should he be?
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.