Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
rockpond

Hype for April 2019 Conference

Recommended Posts

2 minutes ago, stemelbow said:

Well, let me take back the passing comment about fully restored.  I don't care to try and dig deep into quotes from past leaders that may suggest as much, even if there are some. 

I don't think anyone has claimed what you are suggesting.  That's my point.  

2 minutes ago, stemelbow said:

My main point is, the changes we've seen have nothing to do with restoration. 

I think "the changes we've seen" have everything "to do with restoration."  The changes have been wrought by living prophets and apostles, who operate under priesthood authority literally restored by heavenly messengers.

2 minutes ago, stemelbow said:

I also find it odd that God would tell Nelson to give some teaser about coming things to restore. 

I'm not sure that God did such a thing (Pres. Nelson is not a sockpuppet, after all).  But I also wouldn't see it as "odd" if He did.

2 minutes ago, stemelbow said:

I wonder if it's polygamy.  Now that'd be a restored practice/doctrine. 

Polygamy was already restored in this dispensation.

2 minutes ago, stemelbow said:

2 hour church?  Not a restored one at all, of course.

I guess we have different understandings of what the "Restoration" means.

2 minutes ago, stemelbow said:

Many leaders, as I recall, have indicated that the type of communication they get from God is feelings, and not so much words that became scripture.  

Yes.  I'm not sure that such impressions are the sole means of communication.

Thanks,

-Smac

Share this post


Link to post
14 minutes ago, The Nehor said:

If people want these things there is nothing to stop them from organizing them. I just think the days of that kind of handholding (and overburdening leadership with them) are over. A true Zion people do not need the help to spend time doing things together. :) 

Of course you're right that people can choose to spend time together if they want, but it is very difficult to create large scale activities like sports or theater programs without the structure of the institutional church. I wonder how Joe Blow would create a stake or region-wide softball league on his own without the support of the stake and regional authorities. If it's not part of the purpose of the church, it won't get that support, and therefore it won't happen. So people join a non-church softball league where they still get to play, just not with other members of a shared faith.

I'm not necessarily saying which approach is right or wrong, but it is definitely a change that many people struggle with. And the trend seems to be leaning towards less, not more, which means people (especially outside of Utah) will continue to have their social needs met outside of the church. Is that good for the church or not?

Share this post


Link to post
1 hour ago, HappyJackWagon said:

I was talking with my ultra-traditionalist parents last night and they were saying the same thing. I think there's a lot of validity to what they're saying. When they were young their entire social life revolved around the church. Church sports programs, church activities, church building projects, farm projects, road shows etc. They were all super involved with each other as a community. They've seen this community diminish gradually over time. No more road shows. No more organized basketball and softball programs (at least in most non-Utah areas). Then there was the consolidation of meetings. Symposia and small study groups were discouraged. Now pageants at church history sites are going away. The disintegration of the church community makes them sad and I can understand that perspective.

My parents see it as the world consuming the church instead of the church remaining separate and peculiar. I can appreciate their concerns as they are very dedicated to the notion of creating a Zion people. In their minds at least it is difficult to create a zion people when the people are not together more than a couple of hours per week. For them, older, life-long members having served in every ward and stake leadership calling imaginable, and now as temple workers, The church has become a place where most people go for a little while on Sunday...and usually that's out of a sense of duty, not a longing for worship (their words).

I imagine it is probably different in many ways for people in Utah, but this is their experience which matches mine as well and we are polar opposites right now on most things church related.

"Church family" used to be something I really felt. Now it feels like an attempt to cling to the memory of what the church used to feel like.

I agree and my folks would agree as well. I was thinking other than church, the christmas party, 2 stake conferences and one stake event a year you don't typically see or get to know other members of the Stake and now i've heard they are restructuring stake conferences even so that it's the sunday session and a training session of sorts on the saturday and that's basically it

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
33 minutes ago, stemelbow said:

I think the concept of Church in ancient times is kind of silly.  It is argued they didn't exist quite like we conceive of them today.  What is to be restored?  The Church never was, at least until after Jesus.  The gospel is really what was restored.  The Church just happens to be a bunch of rules, regulations, and practices getting codified.

This gets into semantics I think. Whether you call it a church or not there's a group with specific beliefs about god and a concept of people set apart for special ordinances they can administer that others can't. While I agree the gospel was restored I don't think that's all that has to be restored. Authority is the key element from a contemporary theological perspective. But I also think there are many teachings that still will be restored than limited groups in the ancient world knew but we don't.

36 minutes ago, stemelbow said:

Really I just wanted to point out that these changes we've seen have nothing to do with restoration at all.  If Nelson has restoration on his mind, I wonder what that might include.  Because dropping the nickname Mormon doesn't feel like restoration at all to me.

I don't think anyone disagrees there. But Nelson's clearly not finished.

36 minutes ago, stemelbow said:

The nature of revelation described to us, as little as it has, usually comes off as it was described for the lifting of the Priesthood ban, you know back when they had to walk back from McConkie's overly exaggerated rendition.

Still not quite following you.

Share this post


Link to post
12 hours ago, rockpond said:

Yes, those who want to continue, certainly have ways to do that.  But our ward troop will be winding down scout stuff by the latter half of next year. 

Yeah.  I am a Webelos den leader and I keep wondering what will replace cubscouts in 2020, or is that the time of the eschaton?  So it won't matter.  Or will there be ersatz scouting in the Millennium?

Share this post


Link to post
30 minutes ago, HappyJackWagon said:

Of course you're right that people can choose to spend time together if they want, but it is very difficult to create large scale activities like sports or theater programs without the structure of the institutional church. I wonder how Joe Blow would create a stake or region-wide softball league on his own without the support of the stake and regional authorities. If it's not part of the purpose of the church, it won't get that support, and therefore it won't happen. So people join a non-church softball league where they still get to play, just not with other members of a shared faith.

I'm not necessarily saying which approach is right or wrong, but it is definitely a change that many people struggle with. And the trend seems to be leaning towards less, not more, which means people (especially outside of Utah) will continue to have their social needs met outside of the church. Is that good for the church or not?

I think that outside of the US having most of your social needs met outside of the church has often been the default.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
50 minutes ago, smac97 said:

I don't think anyone has claimed what you are suggesting.  That's my point.  

I gotcha.  I'm feeling less interested in that issue, so have fun taking that point.  

50 minutes ago, smac97 said:

I think "the changes we've seen" have everything "to do with restoration."  The changes have been wrought by living prophets and apostles, who operate under priesthood authority literally restored by heavenly messengers.

Ok.  So they restored 2 hour church?  Restored dropping the nickname Mormon, re-emphasizing the Church of Jesus Christ?  I'm guessing we do have different ideas to what it means to restore.  Just because they made the decisions that they did, does not mean those things were restored.  

50 minutes ago, smac97 said:

I'm not sure that God did such a thing (Pres. Nelson is not a sockpuppet, after all).  But I also wouldn't see it as "odd" if He did.

Polygamy was already restored in this dispensation.

I guess we have different understandings of what the "Restoration" means.

Yes.  I'm not sure that such impressions are the sole means of communication.

Thanks,

-Smac

 

Share this post


Link to post
19 minutes ago, clarkgoble said:

This gets into semantics I think. Whether you call it a church or not there's a group with specific beliefs about god and a concept of people set apart for special ordinances they can administer that others can't. While I agree the gospel was restored I don't think that's all that has to be restored. Authority is the key element from a contemporary theological perspective. But I also think there are many teachings that still will be restored than limited groups in the ancient world knew but we don't.

So what, in terms of restoring the Church, are you imagining has yet been restored?  It seems to me much of, most of, if not all of what we call the Church today was not had in ancient times.  Perhaps the concept of the fullness of the gospel being restored makes sense to some degree, but fully restoring the Church?  Doesn't really make sense, if you ask me.  But if you say so, enlighten me.  

19 minutes ago, clarkgoble said:

I don't think anyone disagrees there. But Nelson's clearly not finished.

Still not quite following you.

no problem.  It's feeling a bit off topic anyway.  

Share this post


Link to post
2 hours ago, HappyJackWagon said:

I was talking with my ultra-traditionalist parents last night and they were saying the same thing. I think there's a lot of validity to what they're saying. When they were young their entire social life revolved around the church. Church sports programs, church activities, church building projects, farm projects, road shows etc.

This was sort of the case with my mother, who grew up in Salt Lake City, but not quite as much with my father, who grew up in El Paso, TX and Tucson, AZ.  Both grew up in the Church.  My mother was fairly involved in Church-related activities, as the Church in the 1940s-1950s had to do a lot more to provide for the socialization needs of its members, and there was a sufficient density of church members in Salt Lake City to make such efforts possible and successful.

On the other hand, I think my father's life growing up was obviously heavily influenced by the Church, but he was one of only a few Church members in his high school.  He never dated any girls who were members.

2 hours ago, HappyJackWagon said:

They were all super involved with each other as a community. They've seen this community diminish gradually over time. No more road shows. No more organized basketball and softball programs (at least in most non-Utah areas). Then there was the consolidation of meetings. Symposia and small study groups were discouraged. Now pageants at church history sites are going away. The disintegration of the church community makes them sad and I can understand that perspective.

I can understand that perspective, too.  But I think the Church can and should adjust its efforts to meet changes in society.  The Church used to have a bunch of schools in Mexico and the South Pacific, but some have been shut down, notwithstanding strong sentiments against such things (such as the closing of the Church College of New Zealand, which I understand caused a lot of resentments). 

2 hours ago, HappyJackWagon said:

My parents see it as the world consuming the church instead of the church remaining separate and peculiar.

I had a chat with my dad about this topic a few years ago.  He saw such changes as understandable and often inevitable.  He said the Church previously set up a number of hospitals to provide for the medical care of its members (in areas where there were many members), but that this was so because medical care was lacking.  As time advanced, the need for the Church to maintain hospitals became unnecessary, so it divested itself of them.  See here:

Quote

In 1963 the Church owned or administered fifteen hospitals in the intermountain area under the direction of the Presiding Bishopric. In 1970 the Health Services Corporation of the Church was organized and a commissioner of health was appointed to oversee the rapidly expanding health needs of the Church and to unite the fifteen hospitals into a coordinated health care system. This system demanded increasing amounts of administrative time and financial commitment by the Church.

In 1974 the First Presidency announced that the Church's fifteen hospitals would be donated and turned over to a new nonprofit organization so that the Church could devote "the full effort of [its] Health Services to the health needs of the worldwide Church." While noting that the hospitals were "a vigorous and financially viable enterprise," the First Presidency emphasized that "the operation of hospitals is not central to the mission of the Church." The First Presidency further indicated that with the expansion of the Church in many nations it was "difficult to justify the provision of curative services in a single, affluent, geographical locality" (news release, Sept. 6, 1974).

On April 1, 1975, the Presiding Bishopric signed the final divestiture agreement transferring ownership and management of LDS Hospital, Primary Children's Hospital, and thirteen other facilities to the new philanthropic organization. This nonprofit organization was named Intermountain Health Care. It is directed by a geographically and religiously diverse board of trustees. With the divestiture of the hospitals, the Church rapidly expanded its medical missionary program-a program more compatible with its worldwide religious mission.

This, to me, made a lot of sense.  Sure would be nice to see the Church get credit for decisions like this.  And yet...

Anyway, I think the statements above (about running hospitals not being "central to the mission of the Church," and also "difficult to justify" given the worldwide expansion of the Church) can also apply to things like roadshows and extensive sporting competitions and pageants, which are also not "central to the mission of the Church" and are also perhaps increasingly difficult to justify.

2 hours ago, HappyJackWagon said:

I can appreciate their concerns as they are very dedicated to the notion of creating a Zion people. In their minds at least it is difficult to create a zion people when the people are not together more than a couple of hours per week.

Hence the Ministering program.  And the effort to reduce time spent in meetings so that members have more time to spend with their families and serving their neighbors.

2 hours ago, HappyJackWagon said:

For them, older, life-long members having served in every ward and stake leadership calling imaginable, and now as temple workers, The church has become a place where most people go for a little while on Sunday...and usually that's out of a sense of duty, not a longing for worship (their words).

Hmm.  I think church services have actually improved quite a bit since my childhood.

Reasonable minds can disagree about such things.

2 hours ago, HappyJackWagon said:

I imagine it is probably different in many ways for people in Utah, but this is their experience which matches mine as well and we are polar opposites right now on most things church related.

"Church family" used to be something I really felt. Now it feels like an attempt to cling to the memory of what the church used to feel like.

Last night my family went out and sang Christmas Carols to neighbors, and we also dropped off jars of home-made apple butter.  This wasn't an assignment given to us by the Ward.  It was an effort to get out and express affection and respect to neighbors.  We had a very nice time, and will be doing it a few more times in the next week or so.

I understand the yearning for yesterday's Church.  But I think the Church's current efforts are pretty good.

Thanks,

-Smac

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post

I want some apple-butter!

14 minutes ago, stemelbow said:

So what, in terms of restoring the Church, are you imagining has yet been restored?  It seems to me much of, most of, if not all of what we call the Church today was not had in ancient times.  Perhaps the concept of the fullness of the gospel being restored makes sense to some degree, but fully restoring the Church?  Doesn't really make sense, if you ask me.  But if you say so, enlighten me.  

no problem.  It's feeling a bit off topic anyway.  

The restoration is not an apples to apples rebuild of an ancient institution. It is giving us the knowledge we need to build a Zion society adapted to our current changing situation so that the Messiah can come and dwell with us. The comment about the foundation being finished and now it is time to build the structure is fitting but the end game for the metaphor is that the Messiah comes and lives in it. This has been attempted in almost every dispensation with Enoch’s city being the only known total success story.

So yeah, a two hour bloc and ministering can be a restoration in this context even if this is the first time in history this exact method has been used.

Edited by The Nehor
  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post
11 minutes ago, stemelbow said:
Quote

I think "the changes we've seen" have everything "to do with restoration."  The changes have been wrought by living prophets and apostles, who operate under priesthood authority literally restored by heavenly messengers.

Ok.  So they restored 2 hour church? 

I think they did so under the auspices of restored Priesthood authority.  

The Restoration certainly includes restored doctrines and scripture.  But those things are only words on paper until they are put into practice.  It is the utilization and implementation of restored doctrines that I find exciting.  

I am also excited at the prospect of receiving "further light and knowledge" in the form of clarifications and expansions of what we have.  These things are happening, and will continue to happen as time goes by.  Our lot, I think, is to work with what we've been given to the best of our ability.

11 minutes ago, stemelbow said:

Restored dropping the nickname Mormon, re-emphasizing the Church of Jesus Christ?  I'm guessing we do have different ideas to what it means to restore.  Just because they made the decisions that they did, does not mean those things were restored.  

Again, we have different understandings of what the "Restoration" means.

I think these two articles from the EOM may be helpful in clarifying what I think (as they inform my perspective):

From the first article:

Quote

As part of this restoration, The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints was organized by revelation on April 6, 1830, "it being regularly organized and established agreeable to the laws of our country, by the will and commandments of God" (D&C 20:1). It has the same priesthood, doctrines, and ordinances, and the same "organization that existed in the Primitive Church, namely, apostles, prophets, pastors, teachers, Evangelists, and so forth" (A of F 6). Eventually, all of the keys of the priesthood, which had been given to man from Adam's time onward, were restored. Prophets who held priesthood keys anciently came to Joseph Smith and conferred those keys upon him (D&C 128:18). These included John the Baptist (D&C 13), Peter, James, and John (D&C 27:12), and Moses, Elias, and Elijah (D&C 110:11-16).

Thus, through the latter-day Prophet there has been a restoration of the gospel of Jesus Christ on the earth with the powers, authority, and ordinances as in ancient times. Other aspects of the restoration to occur are the gathering of Israel, the second coming of Christ, and the Millennium. [See also Dispensations of the Gospel; Restoration of All Things.]

From the second (emphasis added):

Quote

The Prophet Joseph Smith testified that he was visited by divine messengers from former dispensations who conferred upon him priesthood powers and restored ordinances, doctrines, and blessings that existed in their dispensations. A brief outline follows:

1. God the Father and his Son Jesus Christ initiated the restoration when they appeared to Joseph Smith in the spring of 1820. He was told to join none of the churches of the day, and he was also taught important truths about the nature of the Godhead (see First Vision).

2. The angel Moroni visited Joseph Smith, revealing the plates of the Book of Mormon, which Joseph Smith translated, restoring gospel knowledge that had been lost to the earth in the centuries since biblical times. Latter-day Saints believe that the canon of scripture is not closed and that God "will yet reveal many great and important things pertaining to the Kingdom of God" (A of F 9), including additional volumes of holy scripture.

3. On May 15, 1829, Joseph Smith and Oliver Cowdery were ordained to the Aaronic Priesthood under the hands of John the Baptist (D&C 13:1).

4. In 1829 or 1830, three New Testament apostles-Peter, James, and John-conferred the Melchizedek Priesthood, including the power of laying on of hands for the gift of the Holy Ghost, upon Joseph and Oliver and ordained them "apostles and special witnesses" of Jesus Christ. This ordination restored to earth the same authority that existed in the Church during the Savior's ministry.

5. The restoration includes reestablishment of an organization to teach the gospel and administer its ordinances. The sixth Article of Faith states, "We believe in the same organization that existed in the Primitive Church, namely, apostles, prophets, pastors, teachers, Evangelists, and so forth." Formal organization of the Church occurred on April 6, 1830, in Fayette, New York.

6. On April 3, 1836, the prophet Moses came to Joseph Smith and Oliver Cowdery in the Kirtland Temple in Ohio and conferred the "keys of the gathering of Israel from the four parts of the earth" (D&C 110:11).

7. The prophet Elias conferred the keys of the dispensation of the gospel of Abraham (D&C 110:12), restoring the patriarchal order of marriage and the gifts and blessings given to Abraham and his posterity (DS 3:127; MD, p. 203).

8. Elijah restored authority to bind and seal on earth and in heaven, including the power to seal husbands and wives to each other, and children to their parents (Smith, p. 252). This fulfilled Malachi's prophecy that Elijah should be sent to "turn the hearts of the fathers to the children, and the children to the fathers, lest the whole earth be smitten with a curse" (Mal. 4:5-6; D&C 110:15). The genealogical research of the LDS Church and the temple ordinances performed on behalf of the dead are integral parts of this process (see Genealogy, Family History).

The restoration will result in the culmination of all of God's purposes on the earth. The scriptures even speak of a reshaping of the land surfaces, with a coming together of the continents (D&C 133:23-24; cf. Gen. 10:25).

The fundamental purpose of the restoration is to prepare the Church and the world to receive their King, the Lord Jesus Christ. Latter-day Saints view the restoration of all things as the work of God preparatory to the time when all old things shall become new, with a new heaven and a new earth. The restoration will include resurrection, regeneration, and renewal to all life upon the earth and the glorification of the earth itself, when it becomes a celestial sphere (Isa. 65:17; Matt. 19:28; Rev. 21:1; D&C 29:22-25;88:17-20, 25-26). As explained by Alma, referring in particular to the resurrection, "the plan of restoration is requisite with the justice of God; that all things should be restored to their proper order" (Alma 41:2).

Thanks,

-Smac

Share this post


Link to post
10 minutes ago, The Nehor said:

I want some apple-butter!

I am surprised that apple butter is hardly a thing in Utah County.  Virtually nobody here has even heard of it, let alone tasted it.

My wife is from Washington State, so she introduced me to it.  Mmm boy!  We previously made it in crock pots, which was an all-day endeavor.  This year, however, we prepared it in an Instant Pot pressure cooker, which reduced the prep time to 1-2 hours per batch.  And the taste is the same (actually a little better, IMO).

Quote

The restoration is not an apples to apples rebuild of an ancient institution. It is giving us the knowledge we need to build a Zion society adapted to our current changing situation so that the Messiah can come and dwell with us. The comment about the foundation being finished and now it is time to build the structure is fitting but the end game for the metaphor is that the Messiah comes and lives in it. This has been attempted in almost every dispensation with Enoch’s city being the only known total success story.

So yeah, a two hour bloc and ministering can be a restoration in this context even if this is the first time in history this exact method has been used.

And these efforts are "small and simple things" by which "great things [are] brought to pass; and small means in many instances doth confound the wise" (Alma 37:6).

Thanks,

-Smac

Edited by smac97
  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
5 minutes ago, The Nehor said:

I want some apple-butter!

The restoration is not an apples to apples rebuild of an ancient institution. It is giving us the knowledge we need to build a Zion society adapted to our current changing situation so that the Messiah can come and dwell with us.

I'm saddened in thinking about the moment disappointment strikes you.  But now I'm just more curious what you imagine is going to restored to give you that knowledge.  

5 minutes ago, The Nehor said:

 

The comment about the foundation being finished and now it is time to build the structure is fitting but the end game for the metaphor is that the Messiah comes and lives in it. This has been attempted in almost every dispensation with Enoch’s city being the only known total success story.

Wait a minute, you think Enoch's city story is something known?  I thought it was just a cute story told long ago, as myth.  Do you then imagine the Jesus came down and dwelt in Enoch's city?  

5 minutes ago, The Nehor said:

So yeah, a two hour bloc and ministering can be a restoration in this context even if this is the first time in history this exact method has been used.

I don't see how that context explains how something never practiced before is a restoration of anything.  

Share this post


Link to post
9 minutes ago, smac97 said:

I think they did so under the auspices of restored Priesthood authority.  

The Restoration certainly includes restored doctrines and scripture.  But those things are only words on paper until they are put into practice.  It is the utilization and implementation of restored doctrines that I find exciting.  

I am also excited at the prospect of receiving "further light and knowledge" in the form of clarifications and expansions of what we have.  These things are happening, and will continue to happen as time goes by.  Our lot, I think, is to work with what we've been given to the best of our ability.

Well I wish you well in that "exciting" ride.  I can't imagine the news that God is easily offended by the name Mormon is further light and knowledge of anything.  I'll keep my eye out in case you guys actually do get some further light and knowledge, I guess.  

9 minutes ago, smac97 said:

Again, we have different understandings of what the "Restoration" means.

I think these two articles from the EOM may be helpful in clarifying what I think (as they inform my perspective):

From the first article:

From the second (emphasis added):

Thanks,

-Smac

Its a simple word.  I'm not sure what the confusion is.  but oh well.  My point's been logged.  

Share this post


Link to post
4 minutes ago, stemelbow said:

Well I wish you well in that "exciting" ride.  I can't imagine the news that God is easily offended by the name Mormon is further light and knowledge of anything.  I'll keep my eye out in case you guys actually do get some further light and knowledge, I guess.  

Its a simple word.  I'm not sure what the confusion is.  but oh well.  My point's been logged.  

I think part of confusion here  is you're failing to recognize that the meaning of the word 'restore" is also being restored.

I hope that helps.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
1 minute ago, stemelbow said:

Well I wish you well in that "exciting" ride. 

Right.

1 minute ago, stemelbow said:

I can't imagine the news that God is easily offended by the name Mormon is further light and knowledge of anything. 

I don't view the issue in that slant.  

The proper name of the Church is important.  Important enough to justify specific instructions about it in scripture, and fairly extensive broader instruction about taking upon ourselves a "name."

1 minute ago, stemelbow said:

I'll keep my eye out in case you guys actually do get some further light and knowledge, I guess.  

"And he said unto them, He that hath ears to hear, let him hear."  (Mark 4:9)

"But God hath chosen the foolish things of the world to confound the wise; and God hath chosen the weak things of the world to confound the things which are mighty."  (1 Cor. 1:27)

Thanks,

-Smac

Share this post


Link to post
10 minutes ago, smac97 said:

Right.

I don't view the issue in that slant.  

The proper name of the Church is important.  Important enough to justify specific instructions about it in scripture, and fairly extensive broader instruction about taking upon ourselves a "name."

"The proper name is important" is further light and knowledge?  Ok.

Quote

"And he said unto them, He that hath ears to hear, let him hear."  (Mark 4:9)

Interesting use here.  Jesus said to his disciples that they knew stuff but those without had to be spoken in parables.  And yet what it seems we have here is a parable of restoring the Church, seeing as it is not really restoring (no "church" in ancient times to restore).  It appears to me you are stuck in a parable, seeing you may see and not perceive, hearing you may hear and not understand, lest at any time you should be converted.  

Quote

"But God hath chosen the foolish things of the world to confound the wise; and God hath chosen the weak things of the world to confound the things which are mighty."  (1 Cor. 1:27)

Thanks,

-Smac

I guess someone's going to be confounded at some point.  

Edited by stemelbow

Share this post


Link to post
2 minutes ago, CA Steve said:

I think part of confusion here  is you're failing to recognize that the meaning of the word 'restore" is also being restored.

I hope that helps.

To understand the word restore, we need to break it down into its components:

REST & ORE

Once you figure that out, it all becomes very, very clear.

Share this post


Link to post
10 minutes ago, clarkgoble said:

I think the fulfillment of the endowment hasn't really been explained (at least publicly). The nature of gender and therefor how to address the LGBT issue in a clear and comprehensive fashion hasn't been clarified. Exactly what Joseph was intending towards women and the priesthood isn't clear. We have women as priestesses in the temple, but it's not at all clear what Joseph meant by keys when organizing the Relief Society. People like Jonathan Stapley suggest two different types of priesthood: cosmological and ecclesiastical. But again that's not really revealed in a clear fashion.  There's many suggestions that the sealed portion of the Book of Mormon relates to making a city of Zion in more clear fashions. The nature of sealings in the next world particularly with remarriages (male or female) could do with some clarification as well as explaining the purpose behind polygamy which never was done. 

Go beyond that into doctrines and there's tons of things one could ask about not the least of which being reconciling the historic Adam with the history of the world.

I'd hope that plenty of changes are coming for sure.  I suppose it'll always be said it is just a restoration of things as they were, or whatever, but it seems kind of silly at this point.  It seems to me that the Church has evolved some and will ikely continue to move and change, particularly as older generations die out and new ones get installed to lead.   The humans who lead, their perspective and imagination is exactly what drives the Church's position, practice and doctrine, and certainly that changes.  

Share this post


Link to post
32 minutes ago, stemelbow said:

I'd hope that plenty of changes are coming for sure.  I suppose it'll always be said it is just a restoration of things as they were, or whatever, but it seems kind of silly at this point.  It seems to me that the Church has evolved some and will ikely continue to move and change, particularly as older generations die out and new ones get installed to lead.   The humans who lead, their perspective and imagination is exactly what drives the Church's position, practice and doctrine, and certainly that changes.  

4

The bolded part makes sense as long as there is no God. Other than that very small, tiny, itsy-bitsy detail you are on your way to truth and excellence. 

Share this post


Link to post
1 hour ago, smac97 said:

I am surprised that apple butter is hardly a thing in Utah County.  Virtually nobody here has even heard of it, let alone tasted it.

My wife is from Washington State, so she introduced me to it.  Mmm boy!  We previously made it in crock pots, which was an all-day endeavor.  This year, however, we prepared it in an Instant Pot pressure cooker, which reduced the prep time to 1-2 hours per batch.  And the taste is the same (actually a little better, IMO).

And these efforts are "small and simple things" by which "great things [are] brought to pass; and small means in many instances doth confound the wise" (Alma 37:6).

Thanks,

-Smac

I second this. We made peach butter in the instapot and it was easy and delicious. Yay for technology.

Share this post


Link to post
1 minute ago, Storm Rider said:

The bolded part makes sense as long as there is no God. Other than that very small, tiny, itsy-bitsy detail you are on your way to truth and excellence. 

Not necessarily?

Perhaps god - the master of the universe - might not be as concerned about what a small fraction of humans do on a small planet in one unremarkable galaxy.

Perhaps god - who loves our agency - is concerned about us, but he fully trusts men to lead men, and does not reveal much or anything to LDS leaders.

Perhaps god - who loves all his children - talks to other leaders of other churches, but not the LDS church because we have become too exclusive and have strayed from His will.

It is hard to comprehend how you see that either God talks to the Mormon leaders, or does not exist at all.  That logic does not make sense?

 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
39 minutes ago, stemelbow said:

I'd hope that plenty of changes are coming for sure. 

Same here.  Not change for the sake of change.  Not change to capitulate to degrading social mores.  But change that will help the Church grow and flourish.

39 minutes ago, stemelbow said:

I suppose it'll always be said it is just a restoration of things as they were, or whatever, but it seems kind of silly at this point.  It seems to me that the Church has evolved some and will ikely continue to move and change, particularly as older generations die out and new ones get installed to lead.

"Particularly as older generations die out and new ones get installed to lead?"  Hasn't this always been the case?  Older generations die out, new ones get installed to lead?

We are 11+ years away from the 200th anniversary of the Church.  Two centuries of the Church growing and adapting.  Two centuries of turnover in the Church's leadership.

39 minutes ago, stemelbow said:

The humans who lead, their perspective and imagination is exactly what drives the Church's position, practice and doctrine, and certainly that changes.  

With respect, I disagree.  Surely the leaders have an influence, even a strong one.  But in the end, it is Christ's Church.  That is what I believe.

Thanks,

-Smac

Share this post


Link to post

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Sign in to follow this  
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×
×
  • Create New...