Jump to content
Seriously No Politics ×

Thoughts on conference


Recommended Posts

4 minutes ago, Calm said:

And if the parents judge them as too immature?

Our Church leaders were aware that those in attendance were as young as 8 years old, I presume.  And still they decided to talk about what they talked about while feeling their messages were inspired, I presume.

So yes on one hand there were some parents who felt their children were too young to hear what they were hearing, if they heard it, while the Church leaders talked about what they felt inspired to talk about, anyway.

Lesson I get from that:  Sometimes Church leaders will share messages they are inspired to share even though some of those listening may object to having some people hear what they are saying.

4 minutes ago, Calm said:

Since topics for conference are not announced ahead of time and women are encouraged to bring their young daughters with them, maybe better for a different time. 

Though other sessions would have included younger kids at this conference, so it would seem more appropriate for a Priesthood session where it starts at 11? these days.

And yet some of our Church leaders felt inspired to share their messages with the people in attendance even while being aware that some of those in attendance were as young as 8 years old.

Go figure.

Link to comment
1 minute ago, Calm said:

 

So you have no problem with your wife being married to five or so other men then?

If that's the way it's going to work out, I would either have to be okay with it or I wouldn't be going to the celestial realm of glory, would I.

So far I know she has already been married and sealed to one other man and I'm not totally sure how all of that is going to work out, with her being married and sealed to me too  I still have the feeling that celestial glory is a good thing to have, though, and I do trust in the Lord that everything will work out, somehow.  Our Father is a really super awesome man and I can't imagine that he would ever want anything less for me than what will be even better than the best that I can imagine.

Link to comment
6 minutes ago, Ahab said:

Our Church leaders were aware that those in attendance were as young as 8 years old, I presume.  And still they decided to talk about what they talked about while feeling their messages were inspired, I presume.

So yes on one hand there were some parents who felt their children were too young to hear what they were hearing, if they heard it, while the Church leaders talked about what they felt inspired to talk about, anyway.

Lesson I get from that:  Sometimes Church leaders will share messages they are inspired to share even though some of those listening may object to having some people hear what they are saying.

And yet some of our Church leaders felt inspired to share their messages with the people in attendance even while being aware that some of those in attendance were as young as 8 years old.

Go figure.

This seems to presuppose the infallibility of Church leadership.  Another foolish assumption, IMO.

Link to comment

“The home is the best place in the world to teach the child self-restraint, to give him happiness in self-control, and respect for the rights of others....

“It is important that you teach your children about sexuality. The Lord has given the responsibility for the teaching of children to parents...”

“This does not mean that you should force the child to confront details. The child’s own pace is usually the best indicator of how and when to proceed....”

https://www.churchofjesuschrist.org/study/manual/a-parents-guide/chapter-4?lang=eng

Edited by Calm
Link to comment

 

4 minutes ago, Ahab said:

So far I know she has already been married and sealed to one other man and I'm not totally sure how all of that is going to work out, with her being married and sealed to me too

 

Your wife has two sealings in force?  She was granted an exception?

Link to comment
13 minutes ago, ttribe said:

I'm misinterpreting nothing.  You are backtracking, now.

Typical you.  I know what I meant when I said what I said and when I tried to clarify what i meant you accused me of misrepresenting what I actually meant.

I know what I meant better than you do.  At no time did I suggest that we not think for ourselves. I was suggesting that we think what our Church leaders suggest that we think because I know from experience that what they think is good for us to think too.

Link to comment
7 minutes ago, Calm said:

“The home is the best place in the world to teach the child self-restraint, to give him happiness in self-control, and respect for the rights of others....

“It is important that you teach your children about sexuality. The Lord has given the responsibility for the teaching of children to parents...”

“This does not mean that you should force the child to confront details. The child’s own pace is usually the best indicator of how and when to proceed....”

https://www.churchofjesuschrist.org/study/manual/a-parents-guide/chapter-4?lang=eng

Teachings from our Church leaders.  You're not suggesting that we ignore what they have taught us, are you?  And if they tell us more than you have quoted will you also use those teachings to teach your children too, effectively having our Church leaders teach them?

Link to comment
2 minutes ago, Ahab said:

Ask me again in about a year.  We're still working with our bishop on this.

And if the bishop or other leader refuses to grant an exception and you are not allowed to be sealed to your wife unless the first sealing is canceled, would you tell her that is okay, since she made the commitment first with him, she should not be sealed to you?

 

Link to comment
10 minutes ago, bluebell said:

I do teach my children things that our leaders have taught, but that doesn't mean that I abdicate my position as parent and instead blindly adopt all of the thoughts and opinions of church leaders. 

Who was suggesting that you abdicate your position, or that you blindly adopt what they say?  Not me.  I'm saying while you act as a parent and with your eyes wide open to see the truth they are declaring when they declare it.

And sometimes while hearing from them live and in person.

Link to comment
4 minutes ago, Ahab said:

Teachings from our Church leaders.  You're not suggesting that we ignore what they have taught us, are you?  

Of course not. I am saying church leaders have in the past and present since the manual is current, taught that parents are the ones who are primarily responsible for teaching children about sexuality and they should do so at the child’s pace and not force them according to some imposed timetable.

So parents who are concerned about children being exposed to teachings about sexuality before they were ready are following church leaders’ teachings.

Edited by Calm
Link to comment
52 minutes ago, changed said:

the church is filled with prideful hypocrites who laugh and mock those who are abused.  Like pharisees praising and applauding Judas, giving Judas money even.... everyone pays the apostles to tell them they are chosen, tell them they are special, while all others are hated by God, and to be laughed at.

Wow.  If this is the way you feel about members of the church why are you even communicating on this board with them?

Edited by ksfisher
Link to comment
1 minute ago, Ahab said:

I'm saying while you act as a parent and with your eyes wide open to see the truth they are declaring when they declare it.

 

No, that's not what you are saying. That's not what we are discussing.  We are discussing the post where you said "If any of our Church leaders feel it is appropriate to talk to young children about an issue then I would think that any parent who doesn't agree should start to think that maybe they should agree with that Church leader and his or her thought that it is an okay thing to talk about."

Link to comment
3 minutes ago, Calm said:

And if the bishop or other leader refuses to grant an exception and you are not allowed to be sealed to your wife unless the first sealing is canceled, would you tell her that is okay, since she made the commitment first with him, she should not be sealed to you?

 

I asked her that when I first married her, but yes I would probably ask her again.  I asked if she would marry me and be sealed to me even if that meant she would have to have her first sealing cancelled, and she said yes.  And she still says she is willing to give him up for me.

We're still checking to see if that is necessary, though.  Or if that decision has to be made now while we are both mortal.  We're aware that sometimes a woman has the sealing ordinance work done for her and all of the men she has been married to and we presume that those women have to make a choice to be sealed to only one of them at some point, so we're wondering if she can be sealed to me without cancelling her first sealing.  We'll thinking we'll probably hear about it in a few more months but it may take a year before we will know for sure.

Link to comment

 

16 minutes ago, Ahab said:

Typical you.  I know what I meant when I said what I said and when I tried to clarify what i meant you accused me of misrepresenting what I actually meant.

I know what I meant better than you do.  At no time did I suggest that we not think for ourselves. I was suggesting that we think what our Church leaders suggest that we think because I know from experience that what they think is good for us to think too.

Typical me?  That's interesting.  blubell nailed it, below.

3 minutes ago, bluebell said:

No, that's not what you are saying. That's not what we are discussing.  We are discussing the post where you said "If any of our Church leaders feel it is appropriate to talk to young children about an issue then I would think that any parent who doesn't agree should start to think that maybe they should agree with that Church leader and his or her thought that it is an okay thing to talk about."

 

Link to comment
1 minute ago, Ahab said:

I asked her that when I first married her, but yes I would probably ask her again.  I asked if she would marry me and be sealed to me even if that meant she would have to have her first sealing cancelled, and she said yes.  And she still says she is willing to give him up for me.

We're still checking to see if that is necessary, though.  Or if that decision has to be made now while we are both mortal.  We're aware that sometimes a woman has the sealing ordinance work done for her and all of the men she has been married to and we presume that those women have to make a choice to be sealed to only one of them at some point, so we're wondering if she can be sealed to me without cancelling her first sealing.  We'll thinking we'll probably hear about it in a few more months but it may take a year before we will know for sure.

It seem so silly that details like this are not known. I feel like Joseph was working on this doctrine and expanding rapidly..but ever since we essentially have learned nothing about how these sealings work or function, just that they exist.

Link to comment
39 minutes ago, ttribe said:

With respect, actually being married is likely to change your view on this.

Could be but I doubt. Not saying I would like the arrangement or prefer it but I think I could deal with it. Then again at this point I am unlikely to ever find out one way or the either so the point is fair.

Also since this is about marriage in another realm I could argue that death and/or resurrection will change our views as well about any form of group marriage.

Edited by The Nehor
Link to comment
3 minutes ago, The Nehor said:

Could be but I doubt. Not saying I would like the arrangement or prefer it but I think I could deal with it.

Also since this is about marriage in another realm I could argue that death and/or resurrection will change our views as well about any form of group marriage.

I get it.

Link to comment
4 minutes ago, bluebell said:

No, that's not what you are saying. That's not what we are discussing.  We are discussing the post where you said "If any of our Church leaders feel it is appropriate to talk to young children about an issue then I would think that any parent who doesn't agree should start to think that maybe they should agree with that Church leader and his or her thought that it is an okay thing to talk about."

So on one had a Church leader feels it is appropriate to talk to young children when sharing his or her message, and on the other hand a parent doesn't agree that it is appropriate to share that message with young children.

So either the Church leader is right, or the parent is right.

Now, to settle the issue.

In my experience, Church leaders share messages that are good for those who are hearing to hear, so even if a parent doesn't agree that their young children should hear it, I would say that it is good for those who can hear it to hear it, anyway.

... even if there are some who hear it who don't think it is appropriate for those who hear it to hear it.

Church leaders are often trying to correct false ideas and false information, so in this case I would say it is a false idea for that parent to think that it is inappropriate for their children to hear what the Church leader is saying.

Have I made myself understood yet?  I hope so. I hope there aren't any more misunderstandings or misinterpretations of what I am saying.  Sometimes Church members need to have their "appropriate" meter adjusted to be more in tune with what Church leaders are saying.

Link to comment
17 minutes ago, Ahab said:

I asked if she would marry me and be sealed to me even if that meant she would have to have her first sealing cancelled, and she said yes.  And she still says she is willing to give him up for me.

So much for sharing your spouse with others then....

Link to comment
Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...