A General Observation.

I agree, it is odd. The old network/password (LDSAccess/Pioneer47) were standard church wide as this one is, and you could find that via Google or people would just tell you. I think the new Liahona/Alma3738 is weird, honestly, because there is so much they could have done – even just changing the network name to something like ChurchofJesusChrist because we don’t actually type that in on a phone we just pick it off the list. Whatever. I think the only advantage the new network has, from a church/organization point of view, is that you’ve consented to the user agreement each time. Where I work we all have to sign a paper with the user agreement (it’s for work use only, we won’t go to inappropriate sites, we won’t share private information about clients or employees, etc.) and if you do anything that violates that agreement that’s the first thing they pull out (“You agreed that….”). Consenting to an “online” user agreement each day is the next best thing.

I can see them changing the logon and password every few years as a formality, clears it the users that are in the area of a building and just leeching off of free internet.

But yes the ‘ aligning with correct name’ made no sense whatsoever, unless they are trying to home the the internet is out current day liahona.

(The article is about renaming LDS Business College Ensign College)

3) Does someone really, and I mean really hate the term LDS?

Yes. Yes indeed. Someone does.

I personally do not hate the term (I don’t mind it, generally.), but I understand that LDS, like Mormon, makes it easy for other Christians to claim we aren’t Christian.

The website stuff seems picky, but, overall, I have no negative feelings about focusing on the Jesus Christ in our church name.

Will using the term LDS be like using D&C (rather than saying doctrine and covenants)? On my mission it was a no-no as it was too close to an abortion medical procedure.

…Didn’t make sense to me then either.

The messages that have been put out ahead of the anniversary celebration lead me to believe that the event is going to be about using the first vision as a teaching tool to invite people to communicate with Christ personally.

It often feels like the church itself is the true object of worship. I’m not sure whether that could be classified as a good or bad thing. Maybe some people need to worship a church and hopefully the church will point them towards Christ in the process. Depending on how you read things, Christ didn’t appear to want attention either, he pointed people in the direction of god.

I know that for me historic experiences often overshadow current experiences. In this context, leaders could have shifted the focus from, “Joseph Smith had the First Vision, proving that he’s a prophet, which proves the church is true.” to, “The First Vision teaches us that Christ knows us personally and will speak to us.” and it would be super hard to feel the spirit of the new message because the echoes of the old messages, both in lived experience and from surrounding culture, are still louder than the volume of the new message.