General Conference Open Thread

[Anonymous]

Elder Uchtdorf rocks.

[Anonymous]

Paraphrasing Elder D. Todd Christopherson – “Just because a general authority, apostle or prophet says something over the pulpit, or writes something, doesn’t make it doctrine.” I see this as a very important/constructive/positive thing to tell the membership.

I was so pleasently surprised. I especially liked the story of BY who was contridicated in the after noon that now the Lord would speak.

I also liked that he said that it is only by personal inspiration of the audience members can they know if what the leader spoke is from God and that is what the early church taught. I certainly know that some of the things BKP has said about gays is not from God.

Is it possible that “these times are a changing”? That is much more like the church I was raised in as a child and young girl.

[Anonymous]

My real takeaway from the talk is that the important stuff is the doctrine of Christ. The simple, profound truths Christ taught. The atonement. This doctrine hasn’t changed much over the years, right? I felt like there was a subtext of “Anything not the doctrine of Christ is actually less important. Use your own judgement and discernment.”

[Anonymous]

It’s the talks like Elder Uchtdorf’s that make listening to conference worthwhile.

[Anonymous]

bridget_night wrote:

Paraphrasing Elder D. Todd Christopherson – “Just because a general authority, apostle or prophet says something over the pulpit, or writes something, doesn’t make it doctrine.” I see this as a very important/constructive/positive thing to tell the membership.

I was so pleasently surprised. I especially liked the story of BY who was contridicated in the after noon that now the Lord would speak.

I also liked that he said that it is only by personal inspiration of the audience members can they know if what the leader spoke is from God and that is what the early church taught. I certainly know that some of the things BKP has said about gays is not from God.

Is it possible that “these times are a changing”? That is much more like the church I was raised in as a child and young girl.

that elder christopherson quoted the statement that a prophet should be taken for his word only when he is speaking as a prophet, along with the rest of his talk, seems to me to be an implicit rupudiation of the 14 Fundamentals. oh that someone would explicitly declare that the 14F are false doctrine!

the clarity of the christopherson’s quote in the Book of Mormon which states, “This is my doctrine” is to me extraordinarily useful in dispelling all the other “appendages” which do not seem in harmony with the core principles of the gospel. i truly think that pride and vain ambition become the unrighteous dominion that impels some “authorities” to think that their opinions and speculations are doctrine, and to declare them as such. the church has painted itself into a corner with this pride and vain ambition, where many members faith anchor is on the authority of the authorities rather than on the pure and simple divine witness they are supposed to carry.

this was a keeper talk– should be added to the “what is official doctrine” faq here.

[Anonymous]

jwald came in and told me I needed to listen to Uchdorf’s talk.

I did.

Then I watched the entire morning session. I want to belong to the church that I saw on TV this morning. No arrogance, no “one and only” rhetoric, no pray pay and obey, no 14 Fs of the Prophet, no guilt trips, no obedience at all costs messages…. Just pure universal gospel and love and forgiveness and kindness….I found nothing offensive with any of it, and I can only hope that the Mormon people will listen to their own prophets – and have the kind of church that was represented this morning.

I had no problem with the messages of Uchdorf, Monson, Beck and even Christopherson. I also liked the story of BY, and the statement that GA do not dictate doctrine, and that sometimes apostles and prophets are only speaking as a man.

Please please please Mormon people —- listen to your own prophets’ message, and allow people to discuss and question and ponder the words of the prophets — and not just sit back and accept every word the prophets utter as coming from god that must be accepting per batim…. and don’t condemn me when I question and discard the words of the prophets, when they don’t make sense to me and go against my conscience. Perhaps, just perhaps, they were only speaking as a man, and they may in the future change their minds…

Is there room for folks like me in your church? Your own prophets seem to think so.

[Anonymous]

wayfarer wrote:

bridget_night wrote:

Paraphrasing Elder D. Todd Christopherson – “Just because a general authority, apostle or prophet says something over the pulpit, or writes something, doesn’t make it doctrine.” I see this as a very important/constructive/positive thing to tell the membership.

I was so pleasently surprised. I especially liked the story of BY who was contridicated in the after noon that now the Lord would speak.

I also liked that he said that it is only by personal inspiration of the audience members can they know if what the leader spoke is from God and that is what the early church taught. I certainly know that some of the things BKP has said about gays is not from God.

Is it possible that “these times are a changing”? That is much more like the church I was raised in as a child and young girl.

that elder christopherson quoted the statement that a prophet should be taken for his word only when he is speaking as a prophet, along with the rest of his talk, seems to me to be an implicit rupudiation of the 14 Fundamentals. oh that someone would explicitly declare that the 14F are false doctrine!

the clarity of the christopherson’s quote in the Book of Mormon which states, “This is my doctrine” is to me extraordinarily useful in dispelling all the other “appendages” which do not seem in harmony with the core principles of the gospel. i truly think that pride and vain ambition become the unrighteous dominion that impels some “authorities” to think that their opinions and speculations are doctrine, and to declare them as such. the church has painted itself into a corner with this pride and vain ambition, where many members faith anchor is on the authority of the authorities rather than on the pure and simple divine witness they are supposed to carry.

this was a keeper talk– should be added to the “what is official doctrine” faq here.

I agree 100%

[Anonymous]

cwald wrote:

Is there room for folks like me in your church? Your own prophets seem to think so.

yes there is. it is still your church, too, by the way, and it needs your refreshing point of view.

[Anonymous]

wayfarer wrote:

cwald wrote:

Is there room for folks like me in your church? Your own prophets seem to think so.

yes there is. it is still your church, too, by the way, and it needs your refreshing point of view.

So agree. I think you are all so wonderful and I wish there were more of us in the church. Feeling free to question and discuss like I was raised with from my convert father who questioned 3 years before he joined the church was encouraged when I was growing up. it really depressed me to see the church muzzle, dictate, and cover up in the past 20 years. I am sure with Romney running for president, this will be helpful to him too.

[Anonymous]

cwald wrote:

Is there room for folks like me in your church? Your own prophets seem to think so.

Yes, we’ve been trying to tell you yes! There will always be members that say no, but they are speaking as man and not for the Lord. :thumbup: :clap:

[Anonymous]

bridget_night wrote:

Paraphrasing Elder D. Todd Christopherson – “Just because a general authority, apostle or prophet says something over the pulpit, or writes something, doesn’t make it doctrine.” I see this as a very important/constructive/positive thing to tell the membership.

Yes, but oh how I wish I could pick and choose the random statements from the pulpit to set in stone as doctrine!!

[Anonymous]

Cwald,

I’ve got a seat saved for you and jwald. C’mon back!

MnG

[Anonymous]

I thought Larry Wilson’s interpretation of Section 121 was very appropriate and useful. Spoke of the men in the church who exercise controlling and mandatory influence on those they’re supposed to serve.

This conference has had several useful talks.

[Anonymous]

cwald and jwald,

Sundance and I will gladly save room for you in the metal chair section where we choose to sit. And if you want we will move up to the cushioned pews.

[Anonymous]

wayfarer wrote:

I thought Larry Wilson’s interpretation of Section 121 was very appropriate and useful. Spoke of the men in the church who exercise controlling and mandatory influence on those they’re supposed to serve.

This conference has had several useful talks.

I agree wayfarer. I have felt so much trying to control members in the past years like when I was told that I could no longer use anything but the 4 standard works and Ensign to teach my lessons with. When I told them that GA’s quote Mother Theresa and Billy Graham and use outside sources all the time in their talks I was told, “Well, they are general authorities. I said, then maybe the church should get rid of the 13th article of faith that says that anything that is praiseworthy we seek after these things. Here is about Larry Wilson: http://www.lds.org/church/​leader/​larry-y-wilson?lang=eng I thought this conference was much better than in the past. Maybe loosing so many members are waking them up as they see the survey’s done on why people leave the church.

[Author]

Posts