- This topic is empty.
-
Posts
-
mom3 wrote:
The Brigham Young Quote is my reliance right now,Quote:“I am more afraid that this people have so much confidence in their leaders that they will not inquire for themselves of God whether they are led by Him”
Oh, yes, I didn’t mention that the BY quote is in there, as is the one from JS about being trammeled.
nibbler wrote:
Sorry DJ, this doesn’t help, I just need to vent.General conference wasn’t that long ago so we got a lot of the follow the prophet business in the month leading up to conference. A lot. My issue? It’s nearly always, “coming closer to the savior by following the prophet” and rarely (in my experience), “coming closer to god by following Jesus.” Is there a difference? Should there be?
We got reminded of the official name of the church by the living prophet. Turns out it’s not the church of the Living Prophet of Latter-day Saints. Yeah, came as a surprise to me too. And while I’m on the subject I have to say, the reiteration of the name change thing… it’s ammo to the behavior police. Maybe if nothing is said the behavior police will just enforce some other rule so it might as well be something benign like saying Mormon.
Quote:What’s in a name or, in this case, a nickname? When it comes to nicknames of the Church, such as the “LDS Church,” the “Mormon Church,” or the “Church of the Latter-day Saints,” the most important thing in those names is the absence of the Savior’s name. To remove the Lord’s name from the Lord’s Church is a major victory for Satan. When we discard the Savior’s name, we are subtly disregarding all that Jesus Christ did for us—even His Atonement.
We strain at the gnat of a nickname but swallow the camel by removing the lord when it comes time to talk about who or what it is we’re supposed to be following.
Sorry.
Good luck with your talk.
Vent away. We didn’t get a lot of “follow the prophet” stuff before conference or surprisingly afterwards. Just the way my ward is. We got a little bit at stake conference, mostly from the MP and his wife (she was especially melodramatic). These talk assignments were made earlier this year (the first part of next year’s come out soon) and all of the topics are “Come closer to the Savior by….” which is par for the course with our SP. Most of the HC takes that to heart and really do Christ centered talks on whatever the topic and our SP’s talks themselves are always Christ centered. I count myself fortunate that I live where I live because I know it’s not this way everywhere.
At the same time I can’t bring myself to asserting that we should follow the prophet because whatever it is he’s asking us to do obviously comes from the Savior. While I won’t hear any of the talks given by my colleagues, my best guess is that point will be made by the majority of them. I am OK with saying that things like loving your neighbor and learning of Christ were things that he taught.
nibbler wrote:
My issue? It’s nearly always, “coming closer to the savior by following the prophet” and rarely (in my experience), “coming closer to god by following Jesus.” Is there a difference? Should there be?
According to the Church, there is no difference. The truth is, I doubt anyone can say with any real authority who Jesus was or what He would do. Heck, our popular, prophet proclaimed “this is what Jesus looked like” painting (algo-saxon, blonde, long hair with beard) is night and day different from what Jesus actually looked like (in all likelihood, dark skinned, short haired and clean shaven). But some people need that authority. They need someone to tell them how to live, even if they are completely off.
Jesus has become more of a rallying point and symbolic figurehead than an actual person. That being said, I’m almost glad the Q15 don’t make direct appeals to speaking for Jesus, i.e. “Come closer to God by following Jesus by doing what we tell you to do”. Imagine if Oaks invoked a more dicrect appeal to Christ? It’d be much more powerful for those who agree with him, and far more offensive to those who don’t.
dande48 wrote:According to the Church, there is no difference. The truth is, I doubt anyone can say with any real authority who Jesus was or what He would do. Heck, our popular, prophet proclaimed “this is what Jesus looked like” painting (algo-saxon, blonde, long hair with beard) is night and day different from what Jesus actually looked like (in all likelihood, dark skinned, short haired and clean shaven). But some people need that authority. They need someone to tell them how to live, even if they are completely off.
Just pointing out here that the idea a prophet or apostle said anything about that particular picture being what Jesus actually looked like is apparently urban legend. I know a lot of people believe it (and I know many who don’t), but there is no evidence to support it ever happened.
DarkJedi wrote:
Oh, yes, I didn’t mention that the BY quote is in there, as is the one from JS about being trammeled.
That has become one of my favorite quotes.
My last talk in the link on my footer dealt with my doubts and how I realized my faith is evolving. I remember thinking that some parts of my talk might be too hard for the straight TBM crowd, or that the bishop would want to talk to me afterwards. The only thing he said was how strong he thought I was, although I felt a little vulnerable.
Excellent. I wish I could of heard it in person. Thanks for sharing.
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.