- This topic is empty.
-
Posts
-
amateurparent wrote:
Elder Gong started out his talk with a joke that I found less than funny. It portrayed his wife in a way that came across as stupid. He wouldn’t have told the same joke about anyone in a position of church authority. I cannot imagine him telling the same joke using President Monson. During an era in which gender is such a charged issue within the church, making such a joke was a very poor choice.
Lighten up! My husband and I both cracked up at that joke. He’d have told the same joke if it had been about himself. We all do things like his wife did.Joni wrote:DHO mentioning that missionaries weren’t killed in the Brussels bombing rubbed me the wrong way. We shouldn’t use that as proof of our superiority.
And honestly? If missionaries had been killed, we’d put a faith promoting spin on that. And if missionaries had walked away unscathed, we’d put a faith promoting spin on that, too.
I totally agree (but then I find myself agreeing with most of your posts, Joni). He could have just said that it was a tremendous blessing that even more people were not killed. But by singling out the LDS missionaries as the ones who were merely injured instead of killed, it came across very self-righteously to me. I wonder what his comments would have been if all 4 of the missionaries had died.Joni wrote:My only issue with JRH’s talk is that I have personal knowledge that God
doesn’tlove me, and there are really no good answers to that. And it’s not the kind of thing that you expect to hear addressed from the GC pulpit. But it still stings a little to hear an apostle declare how much God loves His children and know it doesn’t apply to me. :eh:
Wow! I’m surprised to hear this. Maybe others on the forum know you better and know why you feel this way, but I can’t believe that God doesn’t love you. Why on earth wouldn’t He? That makes me feel so bad!Regarding dissenting votes during General Conference, this is an interesting article. The comments posted to it were interesting too.
http://www.ldsliving.com/Dissenting-Votes-at-Conference-Everything-You-Need-to-Know/s/78523 Katzpur wrote:Joni wrote:My only issue with JRH’s talk is that I have personal knowledge that God
doesn’tlove me, and there are really no good answers to that. And it’s not the kind of thing that you expect to hear addressed from the GC pulpit. But it still stings a little to hear an apostle declare how much God loves His children and know it doesn’t apply to me. :eh:
Wow! I’m surprised to hear this. Maybe others on the forum know you better and know why you feel this way, but I can’t believe that God doesn’t love you. Why on earth wouldn’t He? That makes me feel so bad!
Joni – sorry you feel that way. I have had times where I very seriously wondered and even flat out doubted if God existed. I still don’t know one way or the other, but I am deciding to live as a Christian as I see the essential core teachings are good. I assume God is good and loving, if not we are all damned and that thought is not good for my mental health. So for mental health reasons I choose to believe. So I feel IF there is a God, then he is good and loves me.I don’t know if this helps at all.
nibbler wrote:One session down, five to go. I didn’t get to watch the General Women’s Session live. I’ll keep my posting brief, I’m really sick and need to get back to bed.
Cheryl A. Esplin:
Quoting a BYU devotional given by Sondra Heaston:
Quote:What if we could really see into each other’s hearts? Would we understand each other better? By feeling what others feel, seeing what others see, and hearing what others hear, would we make, and take, the time to serve others, and would we treat them differently? Would we treat them with more patience, more kindness, and more tolerance?
It would be an invasion of privacy. And it would lead to massive judgmentalism. If people really knew the state of my heart regarding the church, I’m sure they would shun me completely. Same with other people — if the church is a place for sinners then seeing into their hearts can’t be a great thing. It’s our choice how much of our heart we share with the world….
People have enough trouble being charitable based on behavior they see, let alone the dark side of man’s ID that is in the heart, and constantly kept at bay.
LookingHard wrote:Katzpur wrote:Joni wrote:My only issue with JRH’s talk is that I have personal knowledge that God
doesn’tlove me, and there are really no good answers to that. And it’s not the kind of thing that you expect to hear addressed from the GC pulpit. But it still stings a little to hear an apostle declare how much God loves His children and know it doesn’t apply to me. :eh:
Wow! I’m surprised to hear this. Maybe others on the forum know you better and know why you feel this way, but I can’t believe that God doesn’t love you. Why on earth wouldn’t He? That makes me feel so bad!
Joni – sorry you feel that way. I have had times where I very seriously wondered and even flat out doubted if God existed. I still don’t know one way or the other, but I am deciding to live as a Christian as I see the essential core teachings are good. I assume God is good and loving, if not we are all damned and that thought is not good for my mental health. So for mental health reasons I choose to believe. So I feel IF there is a God, then he is good and loves me.I don’t know if this helps at all.
I think this is something many of us struggle with, actually. I also went through a phase of agnosticism, near atheism. The only evidence I have for the existence of God is that I don’t believe all of this “just happened.” I suppose that makes me an intelligent design believer. I usually just say I believe in the Creator-God. I was moved by Pres. Uchtdorf’s talk yesterday. I usually dismiss the speakers who talk about God loving us individually (i.e. “God loves you”) as parroting. How does someone else know that God loves me? Or anyone else for that matter? Of course Pres. Uchtdorf usually speaks more expansively (as in “God loves us”) but this time did go a bit further – but I was very moved at that point.
I believe in the Savior, I suppose as most Christians do. I don’t know that there is one, I believe and hope there is one. I feel what I believe is the influence of the Holy Ghost when I think about the atonement of Christ – but admit that could very well be confirmation bias. Likewise, I don’t know that God loves me personally, and I don’t even necessarily believe he does, yet I somehow hope he does. Could he love us collectively? Sure, I can also believe and hope for that. Meanwhile, as LH says, I’ll just try to be a good person and be nice to my fellow humans.
I really, really liked this line from Pres. Uchtdorf (see my signature line):
Quote:But do not despair. If you cannot muster faith right now, begin with hope. If you cannot say you know God is there, you can hope that He is. You can desire to believe. That is enough to start.
SilentDawning wrote:nibbler wrote:One session down, five to go. I didn’t get to watch the General Women’s Session live. I’ll keep my posting brief, I’m really sick and need to get back to bed.
Cheryl A. Esplin:
Quoting a BYU devotional given by Sondra Heaston:
Quote:What if we could really see into each other’s hearts? Would we understand each other better? By feeling what others feel, seeing what others see, and hearing what others hear, would we make, and take, the time to serve others, and would we treat them differently? Would we treat them with more patience, more kindness, and more tolerance?
It would be an invasion of privacy. And it would lead to massive judgmentalism. If people really knew the state of my heart regarding the church, I’m sure they would shun me completely. Same with other people — if the church is a place for sinners then seeing into their hearts can’t be a great thing. It’s our choice how much of our heart we share with the world….
People have enough trouble being charitable based on behavior they see, let alone the dark side of man’s ID that is in the heart, and constantly kept at bay.
Yeah, …no. I think what she was trying to say was that if we could see into each others’ hearts as God does, we would have more compassion for each other. I get what you’re saying, SD, I have been the victim of the self righteous judges in many places. If that same worldly judgementalism were applied to being able to see into another’s heart, then buy all means it would probably be a bad thing. I don’t think she was talking about the church at all, I think she was talking about the gospel. If we could love as Christ loved, if we could walk even a few feet in someone else’s shoes, we would no doubt see them differently and no doubt be more compassionate and loving toward that person ourselves. Truth is “in the quiet heart is hidden sorrows that the eye can’t see” – but if we could, I think we’d all weep with each other and truly mourn with those who mourn.
I thought I heard a speaker yesterday refer to “chronic depression” and now I can’t find it. Does anyone remember who delivered that talk? Shawn, Pres. Uchtdorf mentioned it very briefly during his Priesthood session talk. He was talking about happiness and he stated that except for some forms of chronic depression that need to be treated, we are in charge of our own happiness. Maybe that was the one you were looking for. I like that he made that exception before he started lumping everyone into the “how to be happy model”. I really loved that talk. I missed the entire conference didn’t even try to listen though I had the chance. Besides DFU any other really outstanding talks I should read? It sounds like a lot had good and bad parts. It seems though the conference was meh overall. TataniaAvalon wrote:I missed the entire conference didn’t even try to listen though I had the chance. Besides DFU any other really outstanding talks I should read? It sounds like a lot had good and bad parts. It seems though the conference was meh overall.
Elder Kearon’s talk on refugees was good as well as Elder Renlund’s and Elder Hale’s. Though brief I enjoyed Pres. Monson’s. Probably best not to take other’s word for it. One person’s “meh” is another’s (what’s the opposite of meh?)…
TataniaAvalon wrote:I missed the entire conference didn’t even try to listen though I had the chance. Besides DFU any other really outstanding talks I should read? It sounds like a lot had good and bad parts. It seems though the conference was meh overall.
In addition to GBS’s recommendations, I’d add Holland and Gong. As GBS said, because I liked them doesn’t mean others will. I often look at my wife’s notes on talks and I’m constantly amazed that she can get totally different messages than I do from the same talk.
After listening to all the talks by members of the Church Presidency and Quorum of the 12 Apostles except for the ones in the prieshood session my first impression was that this was one of the most tedious and forgettable conferences to listen to overall in the last several years. In a way I guess that was a good thing because I don’t remember many blatantly offensive comments compared to some of the things BKP, L. Tom Perry, and others have said in recent years but at the same time I don’t remember anything that sounded very significant or inspiring as a whole (e.g. not something cherry-picked and taken out of context as a short sound bite or meme). For example, Holland’s comment, “The great thing about the gospel is that we get credit for trying, even if we don’t succeed” sounds good in theory but the problem is that saying this doesn’t change the fact that the basic temple worthiness points such as the WoW, chastity, tithing, and testimony are still treated as if there is no halfway in the Church, they are basically all-or-nothing to a large extent in many cases, and Church members are typically not going to be given much if any credit whatsoever for trying but not succeeding to outwardly conform in the case of some of these points.
Even in the case of Andersen’s talk on children that I actually thought was a decent talk by itself, I was mostly thinking, “How can you talk like that right after you guys implemented the notorious handbook policy to exclude the children of gay parents?” and it just seemed hypocritical and in poor taste for them to act like they care so much about children in light of this recent controversy. One other thing I noticed is that it seems like they have really started talking quite a lot about the basic nuts and bolts of LDS doctrines as if Church members have never heard of these concepts before when in reality Church members already hear about these doctrines over and over again in lessons so why they think this is the best use of the limited time they have to to say something worthwhile or meaningful that only comes around twice per year is beyond me.
Worst recap of Gen Conf ever (which I authored). This one’s just for fun: http://www.wheatandtares.org/20811/april-2016-gen-conf-in-gifs/
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.