April 2016 General Conference

[Anonymous]

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.

I think I am in pretty much the same boat. I do not believe the church leaders are oracles of God but rather good people doing their best to run things and give good advice. How many hours of good advice can I sit through? I do not watch CSPAN either. Just tell me when the congress passes legislation and how it might affect me. I therefore really appreciate these StayLDS conference recaps.

GBSmith wrote:

One person’s “meh” is another’s (what’s the opposite of meh?)…

The opposite of “meh” is “Yeah, Baby, Yeah!”

[Anonymous]

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?

There was a striking moment that I don’t think should be missed. But you have to watch it, not read it. And you have to watch the full conference video, not the excerpted talk.

Here is the link to download the “small” version of the session, but be aware that is is over 800MB, so may take some time: https://d1e635tdewwzdn.cloudfront.net/assets/general-conference/april-2016-general-conference/2016-04-5000-sunday-afternoon-session-360p-eng.mp4?download=true

Elder Kearon’s talk in the Sunday Afternoon Session was moving. Again, watch the full conference broadcast not just talk by itself. He starts speaking at about 36:50 into the broacast. It’s a topic that falls exactly into the category of messages that we’ve always said at StayLDS we wanted to hear in GC but have been sorely lacking. He never mentioned JS, the Gold Plates, the Restoration, the Priesthood, the Old Ship Zion. He quoted two scriptures (as I recall), both from the New Testament. He spoke of the need to help refugees. What made this more powerful than just the talk on its own is that Elder Kearon spoke about how some refugees will go on to great contributions to society as scientists, physicians, artists, religious leaders, etc. At the conclusion of the talk, DFU stood, as it was his duty to conduct the session. He was quite emotional. DFU, himself, was a refugee as a child, but was old enough then to be able to remember. And now, he stood at the pulpit; a member of the Church’s First Presidency. I can only imagine what was going through his mind. The combination of Elder Kearon’s words and DFU’s emotion, made for one of the greatest GC moments I can recall.

[Anonymous]

The Powerful Story Behind The Choir Member Who Cried at Conference

[img]http://www.ldsdaily.com/wp-content/uploads/2016/04/The-Powerful-Story-Behind-The-Choir-Member-Who-Cried-at-Conference-660×330.jpg[/img]

http://www.ldsdaily.com/personal-lds-blog/the-powerful-story-behind-the-choir-member-who-cried-at-conference/

I’m sure many of you saw this man weeping during the very moving rendition of “Come Thou Fount of Every Blessing” in the Saturday morning session. This article shares a little more of the story behind this man’s tears. I too was touched by the music in these conference sessions. Mac Wilberg is a master.

Quote:

“It is as if he has bottled my Savior’s love, condensed it into the sweetest nectar, and I get to drink it.”

[Anonymous]

Quote:

At the conclusion of the talk, DFU stood, as it was his duty to conduct the session. He was quite emotional. DFU, himself, was a refugee as a child, but was old enough then to be able to remember. And now, he stood at the pulpit; a member of the Church’s First Presidency. I can only imagine what was going through his mind. The combination of Elder Kearon’s words and DFU’s emotion, made for one of the greatest GC moments I can recall.

On Own – I was already crying through Kearon’s address and about to walk away when DFU walked up to conduct, at first I wondered if I was projecting my emotions to him, but as he kept going it was clear he was moved beyond words. After that I turned off the session. I wanted to savor the joy and emotions I was experiencing and had just watched.

Faithful Skeptic –

Quote:

“It is as if he has bottled my Savior’s love, condensed it into the sweetest nectar, and I get to drink it.”

I may beat this horse dead, but I so believe if the leadership spent more hours creating these moments for each of us we would not only cry as he did, but we wouldn’t need all the other lectures. We also wouldn’t need a rescue program. Love would win every time. Thanks for sharing his story. It was beautiful.

[Anonymous]

kate5 wrote:

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.

Thanks, kate5! I thought it was Brother Uchtdorf who said it, so I listened to his Sunday morning talk three times yesterday and didn’t hear it. I thought I was crazy or his talk got edited 🙄

I like that he is aware of how depression can affect people. However, I am very disenchanted by the idea that God/the Gospel/Holy Ghost are not powerful enough to penetrate depression. Anyway, that’s been discussed on other threads. Thanks again.

[Anonymous]

Katzpur wrote:

Joni wrote:

My only issue with JRH’s talk is that I have personal knowledge that God doesn’t love 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!

The short version is, I went to the temple, sat in the celestial room and poured out my heart to Heavenly Father, I asked Him if He loved me and He said “no.” I wouldn’t believe that such a thing was possible if I hadn’t experienced it myself. My husband doesn’t believe me when I tell him what I felt. And I’m sure that Elder Holland was sincere when he said “God loves everybody.” It was just a jarring moment of cog. diss. in an otherwise great talk. Because I could tell that Holland really felt what he was saying – yet that doesn’t override my own personal experience.

I find Holland to be really polarizing, I either love his talks or don’t care for them. I loved this one, velociraptor and all. (Actually I think it was a T. rex. Any paleontologists on StayLDS?) And I want to believe that God loves me, as Holland has mentioned in many of his talks, I just happen to know otherwise.

For me, this conference got off to kind of a slow start (I missed the Women’s Session but I heard it was great) but really ramped up towards the end. Uchtdorf gave not one, but two classic talks. Elder Holland gave a great capstone to the weekend.

[Anonymous]

Minyan Man wrote:

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

Now I want to know what John W. Taylor said about the choir that made them stand up and oppose him during conference. 😈

[Anonymous]

Joni wrote:

The short version is, I went to the temple, sat in the celestial room and poured out my heart to Heavenly Father, I asked Him if He loved me and He said “no.” I wouldn’t believe that such a thing was possible if I hadn’t experienced it myself. My husband doesn’t believe me when I tell him what I felt. And I’m sure that Elder Holland was sincere when he said “God loves everybody.” It was just a jarring moment of cog. diss. in an otherwise great talk. Because I could tell that Holland really felt what he was saying – yet that doesn’t override my own personal experience.

Well, I’m certainly not in a position to tell you what you heard, because I’m not you. About all I can really say is that there have been times in my life when I’ve been absolutely positive that I heard someone say one thing and the person is every bit as insistent that he DID NOT SAY THAT! So, I hope you’ll at least consider that possibility.

[Anonymous]

Joni wrote:

Now I want to know what John W. Taylor said about the choir that made them stand up and oppose him during conference. 😈

The remarks supposedly came from a general conference session held on October 7, 1898. Here’s links to the talk:

http://contentdm.lib.byu.edu/cdm/compoundobject/collection/desnews5/id/24545/rec/18” class=”bbcode_url”>http://contentdm.lib.byu.edu/cdm/compoundobject/collection/desnews5/id/24545/rec/18

Page 1

Page 2

Page 3

The offending comments are right there on page 1.

Quote:

I was informed by a lady in Salt Lake who keeps a rooming house, that after the close of practices by the Tabernacle choir, several members come to her rooming house for immoral purposes.

Juicy.

After skimming this entire talk… you think conference addresses are bad now, you don’t know nuthin’. 😆

[Anonymous]

I think I had a time that I FELT God didn’t love me, but I never felt like he TOLD me that. I don’t want to be an armchair therapist but I have to say that I wonder if depression is playing a part. I would suggest you check with a therapist just to rule that out.

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Anonymous]

I was going to post this on the “Questions” thread, but it got closed. Here’s my analysis of what Elder Oaks meant by opposition. http://www.churchistrue.com/blog/elder-dallin-h-oaks-opposition-in-all-things/ Summary: I don’t think he meant opposition to include simple disagreement or even expressing disagreement but a more organized and intentionally motivated opposition against the church.

[Anonymous]

churchistrue wrote:

I was going to post this on the “Questions” thread, but it got closed. Here’s my analysis of what Elder Oaks meant by opposition. http://www.churchistrue.com/blog/elder-dallin-h-oaks-opposition-in-all-things/ Summary: I don’t think he meant opposition to include simple disagreement or even expressing disagreement but a more organized and intentionally motivated opposition against the church.

I agree… but try convincing my BP of that. I think that’s where a lot of people run into issues. They nuance things for themselves but then someone comes along and doesn’t give them any space.

[Anonymous]

nibbler wrote:

churchistrue wrote:

I was going to post this on the “Questions” thread, but it got closed. Here’s my analysis of what Elder Oaks meant by opposition. http://www.churchistrue.com/blog/elder-dallin-h-oaks-opposition-in-all-things/ Summary: I don’t think he meant opposition to include simple disagreement or even expressing disagreement but a more organized and intentionally motivated opposition against the church.

I agree… but try convincing my BP of that. I think that’s where a lot of people run into issues. They nuance things for themselves but then someone comes along and doesn’t give them any space.

What do you mean by this exactly, nibbler? I’m not sure I get your point. (problem on my end…thanks for being patient with me)

[Anonymous]

When Elder Oaks says “questions are honored but opposition is not” I can take a step back and say that Elder Oaks meant organized opposition. It’s my interpretation.

A BP could take a step back and arrive at a totally different conclusion. Elder Oaks meant don’t disagree with the brethren. Period. It’s his interpretation.

Now stick us both in the same Sunday School class, I make a comment about supporting SSM, I suddenly find myself in the BP’s office, and 20 minutes later I’m down one TR. The classic leadership roulette. I could argue my interpretation to the BP until I’m blue in the face but if the BP is set on their interpretation all my arguing does is prove the BP’s point, that I’m opposing the brethren… even in my interpretation of the talk.

It’s a rather extreme example, likely not close to the average case, but it happens. Even the very concept of “organized opposition” affords a lot of wiggle room. Is organized opposition chartering a group with the goal of bringing down the church? Is organized opposition sharing a blog post with all my friends? Is organized opposition marching in a pride parade?

For me the stages of processing Oaks’ statement are:

1) Gut reaction: no sir, I don’t like it.

2) Well when I look at it from this angle it’s not so bad, it doesn’t pertain to my situation as much as I had originally thought.

3) To live comfortably I better keep my opinion to myself otherwise I run the risk of someone in a position of organizational authority over me coming along and telling me I’m wrong, and how Oaks’ statement might actually pertain to my situation after all.

Everyone has their own interpretations, unfortunately at church there are people that have a little authority over others and a few that might be inclined to exercise unrighteous dominion.

[Anonymous]

Thanks for that, and I agree. The roulette thing is real and could vary a lot from one person and one area and one time in history to others.

Perhaps the “christian” thing to do is be aware of the surroundings and environment and weigh that with the reaction and how it is done.

nibbler wrote:

When Elder Oaks says “questions are honored but opposition is not” I can take a step back and say that Elder Oaks meant organized opposition. It’s my interpretation.

A BP could take a step back and arrive at a totally different conclusion. Elder Oaks meant don’t disagree with the brethren. Period. It’s his interpretation.

There will be different interpretations.

To me, that is part of practicing our religion. How to work out the differences, because there will be differences.

Once an authority figure has told you that your opinion is in “opposition”…things take a turn. The ante is raised. Compassion and humility become at odds with authority and order.

I guess in my mind…opposition is not the evil or problem. Contention is. I can be at opposition with my BP, and strive to avoid contention on my end if he will strive to avoid it from his end.

And God will judge our actions according to our hearts.

[Author]

Posts