Emphasis on Christ - what does that mean to you?

[JLHPROF]

In another thread Tacenda said:

Quote

The thing that bothers me is sitting in Sacrament Meeting yesterday, and listening to a missionary sister who's about to serve a mission and not mention Jesus Christ the whole time. Jesus is totally in the background, but I guess it's because Jesus is a given.  It seemed the whole idea of going on a mission was what was being worshiped. But I know she is young and probably really nervous, and hopefully has a great testimony of the Saviour.

We've had repeated discussions on this board about mention of Christ in Sacrament meetings, about focus on Christ at Christmas, etc.

So, if we want to emphasize Christ in ALL our meetings, I would like to know - what is it you think we should emphasize and how should that look?

Is the idea that the only doctrine we bother with should be the atonement and first principles?
Is the idea that we spend all our meetings singing praise to Christ?
Is the idea that the majority of our meetings and lessons should focus on Christ's teachings in the scriptures?

For those that feel we don't focus on Christ enough, what should things look like to improve?  Should we look more like an evangelical religion?
Just curious.

 

[Tacenda]

36 minutes ago, JLHPROF said:

In another thread Tacenda said:

We've had repeated discussions on this board about mention of Christ in Sacrament meetings, about focus on Christ at Christmas, etc.

So, if we want to emphasize Christ in ALL our meetings, I would like to know - what is it you think we should emphasize and how should that look?

Is the idea that the only doctrine we bother with should be the atonement and first principles?
Is the idea that we spend all our meetings singing praise to Christ?
Is the idea that the majority of our meetings and lessons should focus on Christ's teachings in the scriptures?

For those that feel we don't focus on Christ enough, what should things look like to improve?  Should we look more like an evangelical religion?
Just curious.

 

Thank you for bringing this up, especially as you are a very believing latter day saint and usually all I ever hear is the opposite, and that everything is fine under the sun where this subject is concerned.  

I never received a personal relationship with my Saviour, but doubt that is the church's fault. I think many in the church have that. I've met many who do. I just wonder if we're missing something by not outwardly worshiping Jesus more during our meetings. Some need that, others get that during their own personal studies, and prayer.

I guess I'm extremely lazy and need something more on Sundays. But not to the point that it becomes overkill, or to the point there isn't a good balance. It's just been bad in my life as far as many ward Sac. Meetings not encompassing enough of Jesus talks etc. I don't want to look like an Evangelical religion, maybe just get some of that. I'm sure the early church was much more similar though.

I kid you not, the meeting yesterday was blatant about not mentioning Jesus. I do remember one time in Relief Society where the teacher, she was from the south, mentioned laying our sins or troubles at Christ's feet. That's the first time I'd ever heard of that. I know that seems a little odd, but it's true. Maybe I'd just not been listening to the lessons well enough. But will never forget that feeling, ever.

[Rain]

Really good question. I too have experienced many meetings where He wasn't mentioned in any talks or lessons. I'll have to think on it some to figure out just what I would hope for. Defining just what it is, is a little harder. 

 

[Gillebre]

Maybe this is just my experience, but I've not been part a meeting or lesson where He wasn't spoken of in some form. 

Talks or lessons should always end, I feel, with some kind of testimony. A testimony of Christ is the foundation of membership in the Church.

[JLHPROF]

If we partake of the sacrament and sing a sacramental hymn there is not a single sacrament meeting where Christ isn't the main event.

The talks can be focused on ANY gospel principle.  Christ is assured a focus in the meeting.

[Storm Rider]

9 minutes ago, JLHPROF said:

If we partake of the sacrament and sing a sacramental hymn there is not a single sacrament meeting where Christ isn't the main event.

The talks can be focused on ANY gospel principle.  Christ is assured a focus in the meeting.

If there is a downfall it is this topic that you have introduced.  If he is not viewed as the center it can only exist if individuals are not focused on the Savior for that ten to fifteen minute period where the Sacrament hymn specifically turns to the crucifixion and resurrection of the Savior, his love for us, and his taking upon himself all our sins.  This occurs at the beginning of the meeting and everything after the Sacrament are appendages to this single, weekly experience of re-taking upon ourselves the name of the Savior.  

If a person goes on a mission their sole function is to teach the gospel of Jesus Christ and its restoration to the earth anew.  Every topic that will be discussed in Sacrament meeting will be about Jesus' teachings or the functioning of his church.  

This criticism is often lodged in an amnesia of what actually occurs in Sacrament meetings and by those who would prefer to see a more Protestant approach in music that invites individuals to be saved - I think.  For the life of me I have never quite understood this criticism.   

[Rain]

Just wanting to know - is this a real question? I was excited to share and learn from this, but now it seems to be that it won't really matter what I have to say. I don't have any interest in writing things out if it isn't going to be listened to.

[Tacenda]

21 minutes ago, Rain said:

Just wanting to know - is this a real question? I was excited to share and learn from this, but now it seems to be that it won't really matter what I have to say. I don't have any interest in writing things out if it isn't going to be listened to.

I'm listening! Don't know if I count or not. 

[JLHPROF]

34 minutes ago, Rain said:

Just wanting to know - is this a real question? I was excited to share and learn from this, but now it seems to be that it won't really matter what I have to say. I don't have any interest in writing things out if it isn't going to be listened to.

Not sure what you mean.
The question is sincere, as is my puzzlement over claims Christ is neglected in our meetings.
I sincerely would like to know what more we should be doing to focus on Christ in meetings and what that would look like.

[Tacenda]

32 minutes ago, JLHPROF said:

Not sure what you mean.
The question is sincere, as is my puzzlement over claims Christ is neglected in our meetings.
I sincerely would like to know what more we should be doing to focus on Christ in meetings and what that would look like.

I remember a time when my Stake President invited the Calvary Baptist Men's Choir to sing with our choirs. And will never forget the power of the spirit when we all sang "Go Tell It On the Mountain". Never will I forget that, maybe I'm going to the wrong church, right for you guys, wrong for me? But feel the most comfortable in my church at the moment. And there were hallelujahs and swaying back and forth, clapping. It was weird seeing this in the chapel and the stake presidency swaying back and forth and clapping. I'm not saying to completely overhaul our church, just add some worshiping in a tangible way. Maybe this belongs in the thread by HappyJackMormon though.

There was an article in the church news about this. http://www.ldschurchnewsarchive.com/articles/48232/Churches-choirs-combine-for-Christmas-celebration.html

For months the ward choirs have rehearsed and anticipated with excitement the opportunity to join with the accomplished male chorus. A program of traditional and new Christmas hymns was presented. The audience joined in singing several carols, alternately filling the evening with a spirit of reverence, jubilation and the joy of the holiday season. The energetic renditions of "Jesus, Oh what a Wonderful Child" and "Go Tell It On the Mountain" were favorites of all in attendance.

Edited June 27, 2016 by Tacenda

[snowflake]

2 hours ago, Tacenda said:

Thank you for bringing this up, especially as you are a very believing latter day saint and usually all I ever hear is the opposite, and that everything is fine under the sun where this subject is concerned.  

I never received a personal relationship with my Saviour, but doubt that is the church's fault. I think many in the church have that. I've met many who do. I just wonder if we're missing something by not outwardly worshiping Jesus more during our meetings. Some need that, others get that during their own personal studies, and prayer.

I guess I'm extremely lazy and need something more on Sundays. But not to the point that it becomes overkill, or to the point there isn't a good balance. It's just been bad in my life as far as many ward Sac. Meetings not encompassing enough of Jesus talks etc. I don't want to look like an Evangelical religion, maybe just get some of that. I'm sure the early church was much more similar though.

I kid you not, the meeting yesterday was blatant about not mentioning Jesus. I do remember one time in Relief Society where the teacher, she was from the south, mentioned laying our sins or troubles at Christ's feet. That's the first time I'd ever heard of that. I know that seems a little odd, but it's true. Maybe I'd just not been listening to the lessons well enough. But will never forget that feeling, ever.

In Alma 36, Alma cries out to Jesus to forgive his sins.

17 And it came to pass that as I was thus racked with torment, while I was harrowed up by the memory of my many sins, behold, I remembered also to have heard my father prophesy unto the people concerning the coming of one Jesus Christ, a Son of God, to atone for the sins of the world.

 18 Now, as my mind caught hold upon this thought, I cried within my heart: O Jesus, thou Son of God, have mercy on me, who am in the gall of bitterness, and am encircled about by the everlasting chains of death.

 19 And now, behold, when I thought this, I could remember my pains no more; yea, I was harrowed up by the memory of my sins no more.

 20 And oh, what joy, and what marvelous light I did behold; yea, my soul was filled with joy as exceeding as was my pain!

Tacenda, you can cry out to Jesus the same way Alma did. 

[Jeanne]

I read this thread about an hour ago..and took a hot walk to think about it some more.  Impressionable teachings of Jesus for me came at the early primary age.  Jesus wanted me to become a Sunbeam and I took it to heart.  The little stories and parables were important to me even then.  I don't remember much in SS in my grade school years or even as a young adult in MIA..it seemed that we talked about so many other things..important too..that would please the Savior, but not a lot about him as a person.  Sacrament meetings were so routine and repetitive that it is no wonder that many of us may not even remember what was specifically said about Jesus or his teachings.  Even testimony meetings were about someone else's experience on vacation..or a concept of a miracle in their lives.  Thinking about this, I realize that as an LDS person at the time, I can understand now why I may not have connected to the Savior as I should have.

If you think about it.  When one talks about the Church of Jesus Christ..it is mostly connected to the foundation in these times..in this dispensation.  This means that a lot of us automatically give that honor to head of it.  Joseph Smith seemed to be the focus if you look at it this way.  All this being said, unlike Tacenda, I have had a wonderful connection with Jesus.  It is work now and harder to do..but I still have him very much in my life. 

After my husband died and I reactivated, I wanted that again.  I remember sitting in RS..quiet..music before opening exercises..and staring at a beautiful face on the wall.  I stared and seemed to be just swallowed in it and my eyes filled with tears.  At that moment, he was no longer a being that I just heard about..I made him  my very best friend.  When I went for walks I talked to him like he was walking with me..I told him things and I even think..I laughed!  But I have known him and still do in those quiet moments when loss is profound and when the beauty of the world represents his hand in everything.

I do remember a wonderful senior year in Seminary where the intensity of the atonement was in every detail.  The size of the nails..the days before..and all his "Beholds" became far from mere words.  I will never forget that Easter of my senior year.

So...this is what I think..if...if..the sacrament meetings and some SS classes could be a little less conventional and more active than reactive..maybe a little outside the box..you could have Christ at the center again.  I mentioned seminary..and yes, we are allowed in our devotionals to add a little something that is probably not allowed in other meetings..but one time, my friend and I did a guitar/song duet to the Michael Jackson song "I'll Be There"...only we replaced "I" with "He'll"...I kid you not..we had big grown football players in class with tears in their eyes..like they had met HIM finally.

If some of the rules could bend just a little..you could have Jesus in play..or a musical..and let the teens get involved to exercise their personal faith..the stories could be retold and the parables could again have a place where Joseph Smith cannot.  He was the head of this dispensation..but there is no restoration of anything unless the church lets the voice of it's name become more prevalent.

 

[JLHPROF]

Thank you to everyone for their responses.

I do understand the importance of having Christ at the center and focus.
But I also don't see an issue with discussing doctrines of Christ's gospel that don't necessarily focus on Christ directly (although there is always a connection).
Tithing, Priesthood, Eternal families, Word of Wisdom, Prophecies, Chastity, the Restoration, lives of the Prophets - all can be connected to Christ but aren't necessarily Christ centric.

Christ's ministry was not all about himself, but all about the will of the Father.  As long as our meetings focus on the revealed will of God I don't see how there is any error.
But I am still curious to see what people think our meetings should look like in order to keep the focus on Christ.

[VideoGameJunkie]

I think Christ is talked about a lot.

[Bobbieaware]

3 hours ago, Storm Rider said:

If there is a downfall it is this topic that you have introduced.  If he is not viewed as the center it can only exist if individuals are not focused on the Savior for that ten to fifteen minute period where the Sacrament hymn specifically turns to the crucifixion and resurrection of the Savior, his love for us, and his taking upon himself all our sins.  This occurs at the beginning of the meeting and everything after the Sacrament are appendages to this single, weekly experience of re-taking upon ourselves the name of the Savior.  

If a person goes on a mission their sole function is to teach the gospel of Jesus Christ and its restoration to the earth anew.  Every topic that will be discussed in Sacrament meeting will be about Jesus' teachings or the functioning of his church.  

This criticism is often lodged in an amnesia of what actually occurs in Sacrament meetings and by those who would prefer to see a more Protestant approach in music that invites individuals to be saved - I think.  For the life of me I have never quite understood this criticism.   

Very good post. I believe the most lcommom reason why some complain about there supposedly being not enough mention of Christ in our meetings (I must say in my ward and stake such an accusation is utter nonsense, as Christ is taught and extolled constantly) is because those who have lost their faith or gone inactive are looking for excuses to justify the situation in which they find themselves. 

Whenever I hear about this subject I am reminded of an anti-Mormon screed I once read where a story is told of young man in the military who reads aloud from the Book of Mormon to his non-LDS fellow-soldier who occupied the top bunk. After several days of reading from the Book of Mormon aloud, the soldier on the top bunk says something like this, "You know, Bob, you've read from the Book of Mormon for 2 weeks now and I've never even once heard you speak the sacred name of the Lord Jesus Christ. Bob, did you ever stop to ask yourself why your Book of Mormon never has anything to say about our Savior Jesus Christ and how his sacrifice on the cross is at the very heart of God's true religion?"

The story continues as our Latter-day Saint named Bob hangs his head in shame and says something like, "You know, John, you're right. Why don't you take a few nights to tell me about your more Christ-centered religion?" Well as most any semi-knowledgeable Latter-day Saint knows, before 2 Nephi chapter 10 (that amounts to 31 previous chapters), when an angel reveals to the prophet Jacob (brother of Nephi) that the Savior of the world will be known by the name of Jesus Christ, the previous 31 chapters constantly refer to Jesus Christ by sacred titles such as the MESSIAH, SAVIOR, REDEEMER, BELOVED SON, LAMB OF GOD, HOLY ONE OF ISRAEL, ONLY BEGOTTEN, SON OF GOD, GOOD SHEPHERD, SON OF RIGHTEOUSNESS, PRINCE OF PEACE, plus many other sacred titles used to identify the Savior of the world. In fact, the Savior is mentioned 3,925 times in the Book of Mormom, and that means he is spoken of every 1.7 verses! 

So goes the propagandistic techniques utilized by those who have a vested interest in finding fault with the Christ-centered religion of the Latter-day Saints.

 

[Storm Rider]

3 hours ago, Rain said:

Just wanting to know - is this a real question? I was excited to share and learn from this, but now it seems to be that it won't really matter what I have to say. I don't have any interest in writing things out if it isn't going to be listened to.

Rain, we are individuals and we each have our own issues, concerns, problems and cross to bear.  Just because this is not an issue for me or that I am hardheaded enough not to understand how it is a problem does not mean that it actually is an issue for another.  Nor does it mean that your input will not be appreciated or understood.  

[Storm Rider]

4 minutes ago, Bobbieaware said:

Very good post. I believe the most lcommom reason why some complain about there supposedly being not enough mention of Christ in our meetings (I must say in my ward and stake such an accusation is utter nonsense, as Christ is taught and extolled constantly) is because those who have lost their faith or gone inactive are looking for excuses to justify the situation in which they find themselves. 

Whenever I hear about this subject I am reminded of an anti-Mormon screed I once read where a story is told of young man in the military who reads aloud from the Book of Mormon to his non-LDS fellow-soldier who occupied the top bunk. After several days of reading from the Book of Mormon aloud, the soldier on the top bunk says something like this, "You know, Bob, you've read from the Book of Mormon for 2 weeks now and I've never even once heard you speak the sacred name of the Lord Jesus Christ. Bob, did you ever stop to ask yourself why your Book of Mormon never has anything to say about our Savior Jesus Christ and how his sacrifice on the cross is at the very heart of God's true religion?"

The story continues as our Latter-day Saint named Bob hangs his head in shame and says something like, "You know, John, you're right. Why don't you take a few nights to tell me about your more Christ-centered religion?" Well as most any semi-knowledgeable Latter-day Saint knows, before 2 Nephi chapter 10 (that amounts to 31 previous chapters), when an angel reveals to the prophet Jacob (brother of Nephi) that the Savior of the world will be known by the name of Jesus Christ, the previous 31 chapters constantly refer to Jesus Christ by sacred titles such as the MESSIAH, SAVIOR, REDEEMER, BELOVED SON, LAMB OF GOD, HOLY ONE OF ISRAEL, ONLY BEGOTTEN, SON OF GOD, GOOD SHEPHERD, SON OF RIGHTEOUSNESS, PRINCE OF PEACE, plus many other sacred titles used to identify the Savior of the world. In fact, the Savior is mentioned 3,925 times in the Book of Mormom, and that means he is spoken of every 1.7 verses! 

So goes the propagandistic techniques utilized by those who have a vested interest in finding fault with the Christ-centered religion of the Latter-day Saints.

 

You have the gist of my thought process.  Having grown up around Evangelicals I am trained in their line of questions and criticisms.  When I hear a similar criticism I have a knee jerk response.  I personally have a problem with the criticism because to me it does not make sense.  Yet, some members obviously have an issue and want something more.  They need to explain themselves and share what more they think is needed or what else would satisfy.  

[Bobbieaware]

1 hour ago, Storm Rider said:

You have the gist of my thought process.  Having grown up around Evangelicals I am trained in their line of questions and criticisms.  When I hear a similar criticism I have a knee jerk response.  I personally have a problem with the criticism because to me it does not make sense.  Yet, some members obviously have an issue and want something more.  They need to explain themselves and share what more they think is needed or what else would satisfy.  

What is most likely missing from their lives is their own growing and stable relationship relationship with the Savior..They can't find the spirit of Christ in the LDS Church because they can't even find him in their own hearts.

[theplains]

2 hours ago, JLHPROF said:

But I am still curious to see what people think our meetings should look like in order to keep the focus on Christ.

If godhood as the goal for your life is a focus of these meetings, then removing that would be a good start.

Jim

[Storm Rider]

42 minutes ago, theplains said:

If godhood as the goal for your life is a focus of these meetings, then removing that would be a good start.

Jim

Jim, I have never thought of godhood as my objective on this earth.  My objective, as I have always thought about it, is to become one with Jesus Christ as Master, Savior, and Exemplar.  This discipleship results in being a joint-heir with Christ, but having godhood as the focus is a distortion and stunting objective.  Since my family joined the Church when I was seven years old, I can only assume that my vision of the Church's teaching was gained directly from the Church itself.  

I do not deny that the Celestial Kingdom, or heaven, is where all disciples of Jesus Christ seek to go, but the fact that we become joint-heirs is not the objective.  The objective is to be face-to-face with our Father in Heaven. 

[Avatar4321]

3 hours ago, JLHPROF said:

Thank you to everyone for their responses.

I do understand the importance of having Christ at the center and focus.
But I also don't see an issue with discussing doctrines of Christ's gospel that don't necessarily focus on Christ directly (although there is always a connection).
Tithing, Priesthood, Eternal families, Word of Wisdom, Prophecies, Chastity, the Restoration, lives of the Prophets - all can be connected to Christ but aren't necessarily Christ centric.

Christ's ministry was not all about himself, but all about the will of the Father.  As long as our meetings focus on the revealed will of God I don't see how there is any error.
But I am still curious to see what people think our meetings should look like in order to keep the focus on Christ.

I cannot comprehend anyone who claims that Christ is not the center of our sacrament worship. Even completely ignoring the sacrament, we hear three or four talks focused on His revealed word on a sacred topic He has taught us about. Why do we talk about following the word of wisdom or the law of tithing? Because they are His laws, His words, and because we love Him

[Rain]

7 hours ago, JLHPROF said:

Not sure what you mean.
The question is sincere, as is my puzzlement over claims Christ is neglected in our meetings.
I sincerely would like to know what more we should be doing to focus on Christ in meetings and what that would look like.

I was just excited that we could discuss this and maybe listen to each other and then suddenly I felt like the posts were trying to downplay anything I might say, but I will trust that you are sincere in this question.  And for those of you who haven't experienced this problem then I hope you are grateful rather than accusatory.    

Can we agree on a few things? That the sacrament is the center and THE reason for sacrament meeting, right? If we participate fully then that portion of sacrament is totally Christ centered. So it should be obvious that when people talk about the meeting not being Christ centered then this is not the part talked about.  Same goes for when we close the prayers and talks "in the name of Jesus Christ."  Or the sacrament song. When I hear from my stake president, a high councilor who was reporting on something said in a meeting by a general authority, and I thought in a *conference talk as well(?) that every sacrament should include Christ  it just makes logical sense that they must not be referring to these things since everyone of those is set for what we should say.

So where does the idea center?  It has to come from the talks and testimonies.  

I have to say that for the talks I really don't remember a problem with this for about 10-15 years now.  It was so bad in my then ward that I listened better than I ever had to see if there was any mention of Christ and I went for months without hearing something.  Lack of Christ in testimonies hung around till about 3 years ago when I saw an upswing.  And at least in my ward now I haven't noticed a lack of Christ in fast and testimony meeting for a year. I am feeling the Spirit so much stronger.  So when I talk about the problems of not hearing about Christ it was past experiences.

 So I tried thinking this through today.  My first thought was, "would it be too much to ask for him to be spoken of in every talk? Would it get too monotonous? Would people just start through his name in there to get it done? So then I thought, "what is happening in general conference talks?"  How many of the talks mention Christ or a member of the Godhead in a meaningful way?  I expected that quite a few or most would, but not all. But every single one of them from the last conference talked about a member of Godhead in their talks, if not Christ and NOT just a principle of some kind.  All of them may have mentioned Christ specifically, but if I got one of the other 2 then I moved on to the next talk fairly quickly.

When I was really struggling with this idea years ago I tried to be ok with subjects about things Christ talked like service and honesty etc. but it just wasn't enough for me.  Any church that doesn't believe in Christ or in God at all can talk about those things.  If we are Christ's church we ought to really talk about Christ.  

Then I started to think about another post of mine this last week. About people who feel they need to be perfect.  People that have missed  that Christ's atonement is for the here and now and not for that last little bit of perfection. People who are overwhelmed with everything that needs to be done.  And I wondered, "is there a connection here?" Have we in some wards and families spent so much time talking about the things we should do and little or no time talking about where Christ stands in it all that some of these people have not been able to feel the Spirit of Christ like they should in our meetings?

So now that I have written a ton I will answer your question:  EVERY talk should mention one of the Godhead in a meaningful way.  

This really shouldn't be hard.  We shouldn't need  to see how we can make Them a part of the talk.  Our relationship with the three should be so integral that the language comes out naturally when we talk about the principles.  We can talk about an actual story from the scriptures, or how we can grow close to Him or how we can learn from him about this principle or how he empowers us etc.  I learned a lot through reading those talks of how a talk can be patterned (and there were a number of styles).

*I'd try to find it now, but I wanted to answer quick and then go swim with my son.

[JLHPROF]

1 minute ago, Rain said:

Can we agree on a few things? That the sacrament is the center and THE reason for sacrament meeting, right? If we participate fully then that portion of sacrament is totally Christ centered. So it should be obvious that when people talk about the meeting not being Christ centered then this is not the part talked about.  Same goes for when we close the prayers and talks "in the name of Jesus Christ."  Or the sacrament song.

Yes, of course that is the center and reason for the meeting.
And of course the complaints about content are in spite of sacrament.

4 minutes ago, Rain said:

So I tried thinking this through today.  My first thought was, "would it be too much to ask for him to be spoken of in every talk? Would it get too monotonous? Would people just start through his name in there to get it done? So then I thought, "what is happening in general conference talks?"  How many of the talks mention Christ or a member of the Godhead in a meaningful way?  I expected that quite a few or most would, but not all. But every single one of them from the last conference talked about a member of Godhead in their talks, if not Christ and NOT just a principle of some kind.  All of them may have mentioned Christ specifically, but if I got one of the other 2 then I moved on to the next talk fairly quickly.

This brought this graph to mind:

We are more focused on Christ than we have ever been as a Church.  Christ didn't even make the top 10 conference topics until 100 years into the Church's history.
Christ is now the number one topic of every General Conference.  And still more is desired.

Quote

So now that I have written a ton I will answer your question:  EVERY talk should mention one of the Godhead in a meaningful way.  

And I have to say, I don't agree.  But that is my purpose in this thread.  To see the other perspective.

Quote

When I was really struggling with this idea years ago I tried to be ok with subjects about things Christ talked like service and honesty etc. but it just wasn't enough for me.  Any church that doesn't believe in Christ or in God at all can talk about those things.  If we are Christ's church we ought to really talk about Christ.  

Then I started to think about another post of mine this last week. About people who feel they need to be perfect.  People that have missed  that Christ's atonement is for the here and now and not for that last little bit of perfection.

This strikes me as too evangelical and not in keeping with God's goals for us.  But I am looking to understand the other side on this.
And I agree, the atonement is 100% definitely for the here and now.  I just see nothing wrong if focusing on Christ's teachings as much as Christ the person.  He never asked for that.

 

[Rain]

30 minutes ago, JLHPROF said:

Yes, of course that is the center and reason for the meeting.
And of course the complaints about content are in spite of sacrament.

This brought this graph to mind:

We are more focused on Christ than we have ever been as a Church.  Christ didn't even make the top 10 conference topics until 100 years into the Church's history.
Christ is now the number one topic of every General Conference.  And still more is desired.

Your question was about sacrament meeting though. I was using general conference as a frame of reference for myself. I have not had the struggle with it that I did in sacrament meeting.

And I have to say, I don't agree.  But that is my purpose in this thread.  To see the other perspective.

This strikes me as too evangelical and not in keeping with God's goals for us.  But I am looking to understand the other side on this.
And I agree, the atonement is 100% definitely for the here and now. 

 

》》I just see nothing wrong if focusing on Christ's teachings as much as Christ the person.  He never asked for that.《《

I see nothing wrong with it either.  The problem I had was the exclusion of Christ.

 

 

[Avatar4321]

On 6/27/2016 at 5:23 PM, Bobbieaware said:

Very good post. I believe the most lcommom reason why some complain about there supposedly being not enough mention of Christ in our meetings (I must say in my ward and stake such an accusation is utter nonsense, as Christ is taught and extolled constantly) is because those who have lost their faith or gone inactive are looking for excuses to justify the situation in which they find themselves. 

Whenever I hear about this subject I am reminded of an anti-Mormon screed I once read where a story is told of young man in the military who reads aloud from the Book of Mormon to his non-LDS fellow-soldier who occupied the top bunk. After several days of reading from the Book of Mormon aloud, the soldier on the top bunk says something like this, "You know, Bob, you've read from the Book of Mormon for 2 weeks now and I've never even once heard you speak the sacred name of the Lord Jesus Christ. Bob, did you ever stop to ask yourself why your Book of Mormon never has anything to say about our Savior Jesus Christ and how his sacrifice on the cross is at the very heart of God's true religion?"

The story continues as our Latter-day Saint named Bob hangs his head in shame and says something like, "You know, John, you're right. Why don't you take a few nights to tell me about your more Christ-centered religion?" Well as most any semi-knowledgeable Latter-day Saint knows, before 2 Nephi chapter 10 (that amounts to 31 previous chapters), when an angel reveals to the prophet Jacob (brother of Nephi) that the Savior of the world will be known by the name of Jesus Christ, the previous 31 chapters constantly refer to Jesus Christ by sacred titles such as the MESSIAH, SAVIOR, REDEEMER, BELOVED SON, LAMB OF GOD, HOLY ONE OF ISRAEL, ONLY BEGOTTEN, SON OF GOD, GOOD SHEPHERD, SON OF RIGHTEOUSNESS, PRINCE OF PEACE, plus many other sacred titles used to identify the Savior of the world. In fact, the Savior is mentioned 3,925 times in the Book of Mormom, and that means he is spoken of every 1.7 verses! 

So goes the propagandistic techniques utilized by those who have a vested interest in finding fault with the Christ-centered religion of the Latter-day Saints.

 

I'm not sure if it's deliberate propaganda or they just have not read the Book of Mormon. It could be both. I've found that reading the Book of Mormon is the best cure for anyone foolish enough to claim we aren't Christ centric.