- This topic is empty.
-
Posts
-
nibbler wrote:
Jean B. Bingham sunk the this is the year the women get the PH ship.
Her talk is a real skipper.
I mainly saw the youth speakers and Sister Bingham’s talk. I felt that the youth did well considering. The young man seamed really sweaty but that may have just been the bright lights and had me wondering if he could use some stage makeup. I liked the young woman’s use of her patriarchal blessing in hard times to offer comfort and motivation. I imagine that most young people (and older people) could use a reminder that their life will turn out ok if they keep on keeping on. It can serve as a personal “it get’s better” to take out and read in times of need.
I agree that Sister Bingham’s talk had some issues. I believe that she said something about in the beginning men and women were different in purpose but equal in value. She mentioned the word complementary of complementarian several times. Then the apostacy or the natural main or Satan came in and convinced men to subjugate women. But then the restoration happened and women were equals again.
This had me scratching my head. Is she really trying to hold out the LDS church as some sort of beacon for female equality? What about polygamy?
Takeaways from this morning’s session. Holland’s talk was great. Worth a second listen.
Oaks has no sense of rhythm. Worth a second watch. You might laugh.
Everything else was same ol same ol, or complete must misses.
Quote:I wish the call to fast came along with some practical advice, like take social distancing seriously. People in my neighborhood are still going over to friends’ houses to hang. The highway near my house still has way too much traffic going up and down it.
Like this
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jJSfz7POzM8https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jJSfz7POzM8” class=”bbcode_url”> Or this Nibbler https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GlRJg2nfujYhttps://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GlRJg2nfujY” class=”bbcode_url”> Oaks just can’t let it be. He could easily have gotten through that talk about the plan of salvation without any reference to gay marriage. At least anyone else probably could have. Long live Pres. Nelson. Elder Cook spoke about us. Hat tip that he acknowledges some challenges to faith are not answered. Two apostles have yet to speak – Uchtdorf and Christofferson. I have a less optimistic take on Cook’s comments. Acknowledgement is one thing, but there were no specifics. We have to go beyond the words, “There’s a place for you.” and truly enact cultural changes. Similar to my comments on Holland’s talk. We have to do work on both sides of the veil/divide. You can’t just say, “There’s a place for you.” and expect the departed to return.
WEhave to make changes. Church has to become a place people wantto return to. Nelson has made comments during this conference that reiterate the common orthodox theme, “If you don’t agree with our doctrines you’re being led by Satan.” We all
justheard Oaks being Oaks. That’s not a church I’d expect some departed to want to come back to. Heck, it’s partially why people have left. “With us, but in the corner.” is not an acceptable place for people we’ve alienated.
Sigh.
I know… preaching to the choir. Sorry.
I agree, Nibbler, and otherwise Cook was very run-of-mill. We will welcome you back no questions asked. Therein is the problem I have with the church. When you can ask me about and acknowledge my problem and offer reconciliation we can talk. If you want to ignore my issue and disregard my feelings then my trust continues at the cautious level. Sorry, thinking out loud.
DFU actually addressed some of my rantings. He tried to give reasons to come back. He also provided an interesting turn on a phrase that’s taken root in recent church culture. It’s been several minutes since his talk, paraphrasing from memory, “There is no minimum threshold to qualify for god’s grace.” Taking the idea from your testimony doesn’t have to be this tall to enter the ride and mixing it with this new business of qualifying for things.
That’s a wrap. Takeaway: apparently there’s this thing called the restoration, first I’m hearing about it but it sounds like it could be neat provided we do it right.
Can someone explain the need for a temple in Dubai? Quote:I agree that Sister Bingham’s talk had some issues. I believe that she said something about in the beginning men and women were different in purpose but equal in value. She mentioned the word complementary of complementarian several times. Then the apostacy or the natural main or Satan came in and convinced men to subjugate women. But then the restoration happened and women were equals again.
This had me scratching my head. Is she really trying to hold out the LDS church as some sort of beacon for female equality? What about polygamy?
This is where I stopped watching last night. After my nerves getting frayed with talk after talk about the priesthood and the complementarian model, I couldn’t stand her implication that female equality is an aspect of the restoration. Even disregarding the continued inequality of women in the church, it feels like an insult to the thousands of people who have advocated for women’s rights for centuries.
nibbler wrote:
That’s a wrap.Takeaway: apparently there’s this thing called the restoration, first I’m hearing about it but it sounds like it could be neat provided we do it right.
You heard Pres. Nelson. This is the church restored the same as the one Christ himself established 2000 years ago. You know, 12 (11) year old deacons, temple recommends, ministering brothers and sisters, Primary. The whole enchilada just like 2000 years ago.
😈
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.