Elder Oaks on opposition

[Johnnie Cake]

Quote

Some of this opposition even comes from Church members. Some who use personal reasoning or wisdom to resist prophetic direction give themselves a label borrowed from elected bodies -- "the loyal opposition." How ever appropriate for a democracy, there is no warrant for this concept in the government of God's kingdom, where questions are honored but opposition is not."

 

Quote

The Church is making great efforts to be transparent with the records we have, but after all we can publish our members are sometimes left with basic questions that cannot be resolved by study. This is the church history version of "opposition in all things." Some things can only be learned by faith (D&C 88:118). Our ultimate reliance must be faith in the witness we have received from the Holy Ghost.

 

Neither of these Oaks Quotes come as a surprise...at least to me...isn't this the standard line of legal argument for him to take when he doesn't have any satisfying answers for the so called loyal opposition?  Isn't this the tack we should expect to see from an organization that refuses to be or unwilling to be completely transparent?  This is also an admission that they've gone as far as they are going to go...so we shouldn't expect any further transparency, apologies or retrenchment in the future...so get your marching boots on, shut up and get in line or get out of the way...they've done all they're gonna do and given all that they're gonna give...

[cinepro]

I apologize in advance if I'm missing something, but I don't see how the first quote fits with the second:

 

Quote

Some of this opposition even comes from Church members. Some who use personal reasoning or wisdom to resist prophetic direction give themselves a label borrowed from elected bodies -- "the loyal opposition." How ever appropriate for a democracy, there is no warrant for this concept in the government of God's kingdom, where questions are honored but opposition is not."

 

 

Quote

The Church is making great efforts to be transparent with the records we have, but after all we can publish our members are sometimes left with basic questions that cannot be resolved by study. This is the church history version of "opposition in all things." Some things can only be learned by faith (D&C 88:118). Our ultimate reliance must be faith in the witness we have received from the Holy Ghost.

 

It is my understanding that to "honor" something means to give it credence and weight, and to acknowledge its importance.  But after we are told that "questions are honored", we are told that if we cannot resolve the question (even a basic question) through study, we should allow faith to supersede the question (presumably through a feeling or conscious decision to ignore the question in deference to other beliefs).

I think it would make more sense to say "questions are tolerated" (instead of honored).  That would fit the second quote much better.

 

Edited April 4, 2016 by cinepro

[consiglieri]

1 hour ago, Calm said:

I heard and read Elder Oaks' comments as saying the entire attack on Brussels was blunted, implying that the effect the terrorists wanted was not fully achieved.  It was not only LDS missionaries who were protected.  And I think "blunting" can refer to emotional suffering as well as physical.

 

I have a problem believing in a God who "blunts" terrorist attacks but does not prevent them.

Or a God who is so busy protecting LDS missionaries during the blast that he overlooks the safety of non-Mormons at the airport.

[rodheadlee]

4 hours ago, HappyJackWagon said:

It's ironic that his talk was about the need for opposition in all things...except the church. It's apparently impossible to oppose the church or leaders for any legitimate or loyal reason.

The opposition is supposed to be from the outside, from the enemies of the Church, not from the inside.

[rodheadlee]

23 minutes ago, consiglieri said:

I have a problem believing in a God who "blunts" terrorist attacks but does not prevent them.

Or a God who is so busy protecting LDS missionaries during the blast that he overlooks the safety of non-Mormons at the airport.

Of course you do. If those missionaries had died you would be screaming bloody murder that God doesn't take care of His own or some such thing.

[Scott Lloyd]

54 minutes ago, Storm Rider said:

They were deeply, deeply wounded - their feelings were crushed by such a blatant disregard of their medical challenges, heartaches, and trials.  Of course, those who don't eat ice cream after were just destroyed because an apostle of Jesus Christ did not care about their feelings or participation in this activity.  Then all those who have never heard of ice cream were mortified that they were cast off like cheap chattel and their hearts were obliterated and mashed to a pulp, beyond recognition for being absolutely dismissed from the group.  All in all it was a heartless, mean-spirited talk and General Conference.  I really just don't know how I can go on.  

I was just thinking: Given the fashionable aversion to gluten that is going on right now in much of the western world especially, should we cease to refer to Christ as "the bread of life"? Or should we elide the line in the Lord's prayer: "Give us this day our daily bread"?

I'm perceiving here another bout with the tyranny of political correctness.

[ttribe]

1 hour ago, consiglieri said:

I was thinking more about parts of the world where it is a day-long struggle just to get a few scraps of food on the table for the family to eat.

 

1 hour ago, Storm Rider said:

They were deeply, deeply wounded - their feelings were crushed by such a blatant disregard of their medical challenges, heartaches, and trials.  Of course, those who don't eat ice cream after were just destroyed because an apostle of Jesus Christ did not care about their feelings or participation in this activity.  Then all those who have never heard of ice cream were mortified that they were cast off like cheap chattel and their hearts were obliterated and mashed to a pulp, beyond recognition for being absolutely dismissed from the group.  All in all it was a heartless, mean-spirited talk and General Conference.  I really just don't know how I can go on.  

 

21 minutes ago, Scott Lloyd said:

I was just thinking: Given the fashionable aversion to gluten that is going on right now in much of the western world especially, should we cease to refer to Christ as "the bread of life"? Or should we elide the line in the Lord's prayer: "Give us this day our daily bread"?

I'm perceiving here another bout with the tyranny of political correctness.

Did consig's clarification ever occur to either of you?

[Scott Lloyd]

1 hour ago, ttribe said:

 

 

Did consig's clarification ever occur to either of you?

So it's not just mention of ice cream or bread we should avoid, but any food altogether?

That has complicated implications for the scriptures, where there is frequent and prominent mention of bread, meat, fruit, harvest, wheat.

Also, mustard, salt, olives, lentiles, pottage, meal, fish, quail, lamb, milk, honey, grapes, vineyards, wine.

 

Edited April 4, 2016 by Scott Lloyd

[Scott Lloyd]

1 hour ago, cinepro said:

I apologize in advance if I'm missing something, but I don't see how the first quote fits with the second:

 

Well, your problem is that you think the first quote was intended to fit in with the second.

I selected the quotes from separate places in the talk because I like both. Then, as a matter of economy, I suppose, I put them in one post.

Was I supposed to make two separate posts so as to avoid confusing you? I'll try to bear that in mind in the future.

Edited April 4, 2016 by Scott Lloyd

[bluebell]

1 hour ago, consiglieri said:

I have a problem believing in a God who "blunts" terrorist attacks but does not prevent them.

Or a God who is so busy protecting LDS missionaries during the blast that he overlooks the safety of non-Mormons at the airport.

Not me!  Seriously, seriously so thank for blunting!  My family is going thru some hard trials right now and i shudder to think of what it would be like without blunting. 

I love the idea that God can help us suffer as little as possible, while still allowing for His will and free agency to prevail.  Making the hard things as easy as they can be without removing them all together (because making my children's lives all rainbows and butterflies would be my choice, but to their detriment) is one of my goals when trying to be a good parent.

[cinepro]

47 minutes ago, rodheadlee said:

Of course you do. If those missionaries had died you would be screaming bloody murder that God doesn't take care of His own or some such thing.

What do you mean "if"?  Missionaries die from all different sorts of circumstances (and regular people survive through apparently miraculous means all the time).  If someone were collecting data on whether or not God protects LDS missionaries from dying (and under what circumstances), there's already (sadly) plenty to back up the hypothesis that God doesn't intervene to save missionaries if that's the determination one wants to make.

[Scott Lloyd]

1 hour ago, cinepro said:

I think it would make more sense to say "questions are tolerated" (instead of honored).  That would fit the second quote much better.

 

If it absolutely needed fixing, respected would be better than tolerated.

But it doesn't need fixing; it's not broken.

[RevTestament]

1 hour ago, Storm Rider said:

They were deeply, deeply wounded - their feelings were crushed by such a blatant disregard of their medical challenges, heartaches, and trials.  Of course, those who don't eat ice cream after were just destroyed because an apostle of Jesus Christ did not care about their feelings or participation in this activity.  Then all those who have never heard of ice cream were mortified that they were cast off like cheap chattel and their hearts were obliterated and mashed to a pulp, beyond recognition for being absolutely dismissed from the group.  All in all it was a heartless, mean-spirited talk and General Conference.  I really just don't know how I can go on.  

As we went back to our car, we encountered a young family in their minivan which had driven all the way from Arizona only to have their young ears assaulted by this inane drivel! In fact tears were streaming down the faces of their 2 young children after learning there was no true ice cream santa awaiting after the conference. Oh, how my heart poured out for the terrible insensitivity which had been dealt upon their innocent virgin ears. They were oblivious to the beautiful spring day God had provided. It simply breaks my heart at the thought of the sheer callousness shown this beautiful family! 

How's that for some new-fangled PC!! I really enjoyed this conference, and as I looked into the smiling faces of these two children who had made the ten hour trip with their parents, I knew that they had enjoyed the conference too. I commend the apostles and presidency for giving us a wonderful conference. Really the only fault I found with the conference was in the attendee who refused to affirm a single one of his leaders surely for some disagreement with recent positions of the Church rather than for a valid reason of unworthiness or unknown fault.

President Monson has to be potentially the least offensive President of the Church in my lifetime, and yet we have a rather vocal minority right now that wants change their way.

[ttribe]

32 minutes ago, Scott Lloyd said:

So it's not just ice cream or bread we should avoid talking about, but any mention of food altogether?

That has complicated implications for the scriptures, where there is frequent and prominent mention of bread, meat, fruit, harvest, wheat.

Also, mustard, salt, olives, lentiles, pottage, meal, fish, quail, lamb, milk, honey, wine.

 

[SMH]  Wow.

27 minutes ago, bluebell said:

Not me!  Seriously, seriously so thank for blunting!  My family is going thru some hard trials right now and i shudder to think of what it would be like without blunting. 

I love the idea that God can help us suffer as little as possible, while still allowing for His will and free agency to prevail.  Making the hard things as easy as they can be without removing them all together (because making my children's lives all rainbows and butterflies would be my choice, but to their detriment) is one of my goals when trying to be a good parent.

That's great for you.  All three of my kids were recently diagnosed with a very serious illness. An illness that has destroyed my oldest son's (age 17) ability to graduate from high school.  An illness that also caused him to have to give himself weekly infusions of IGG for more than a year.  An illness that has caused my 10 year-old son to be out of school since Thanksgiving.  An illness that is causing a heart-breakingly obvious tic in my 8 year-old daughter that leaves her embarrassed and humiliated around her peers.  An illness that left us going out of pocket more than $30k in 2014 to treat (haven't added up 2015, yet).  In the midst of all this, my business partner suddenly decided to backtrack on our deal for him to retire and he threw me out of our firm.  My mother was recently diagnosed with breast cancer.  Our house was recently damaged to the tune of $12k due to a faulty water line to the ice maker in our refrigerator.  I'm not going to lie, I don't feel like these trials have been "blunted" at all for me and my family.  Why one family, and not the other?  If you begin following some of the doctrinal lines of reasoning (especially as they relate to promises associated with keeping certain commandments, for example) it's very easy to lead to very frightening conclusions; conclusions that have left me in some very dark places in my own head in the last few years.  Comments like those from Elder Oaks and being lightly bandied about in this thread don't help me.  Not at all.  I'm often left feeling worse for having attended Church and sitting through these types of discussions.

Edited April 4, 2016 by ttribe

[Scott Lloyd]

10 minutes ago, RevTestament said:

As we went back to our car, we encountered a young family in their minivan which had driven all the way from Arizona only to have their young ears assaulted by this inane drivel! In fact tears were streaming down the faces of their 2 young children after learning there was no true ice cream santa awaiting after the conference. Oh, how my heart poured out for the terrible insensitivity which had been dealt upon their innocent virgin ears. They were oblivious to the beautiful spring day God had provided. It simply breaks my heart at the thought of the sheer callousness shown this beautiful family! 

How's that for some new-fangled PC!! I really enjoyed this conference, and as I looked into the smiling faces of these two children who had made the ten hour trip with their parents, I knew that they had enjoyed the conference too. I commend the apostles and presidency for giving us a wonderful conference. Really the only fault I found with the conference was in the attendee who refused to affirm a single one of his leaders surely for some disagreement with recent positions of the Church rather than for a valid reason of unworthiness or unknown fault.

President Monson has to be potentially the least offensive President of the Church in my lifetime, and yet we have a rather vocal minority right now that wants change their way.

Was it just one attendee this time? I could only hear one person shouting on the broadcast, but I wondered if there were more.

[HappyJackWagon]

1 hour ago, rodheadlee said:

The opposition is supposed to be from the outside, from the enemies of the Church, not from the inside.

This is why the entire premise is wrong. Opposition does not make one an enemy. In fact, often times opposition helps to improve and make things better. If opposition is always viewed as negative and hostile then leaders will hunker down and become even more isolated. On the other hand, if they are open to honest critiques and suggestions (which leaders often take to be opposition) then they can grow and lead better. The top down only mentality is a weak system of administration, whether for a government or a church.

There should be top-down.

But there should also be bottom-up.

There should also be side-to-side and diagonal. Open, honest communication from all directions will make the church stronger. Requiring Top-down only, and assuming that everything else is negative opposition, is a problem.

[The Nehor]

20 hours ago, Teancum said:

1:  This presupposes Satan is a real being.  Evidence of such a being it scarce.

2:  The comment about loyal opposition really means "So what we say and don't vocally ask questions or express doubts."   One may wonder why outsiders view the LDS Church as a border line cult.  This approach certainly raises such a question as reasonable to discuss.

3: the conclusion is just have faith.  Faith seems to be the answer for most things religious when there is not evidence and the rational result may be to reject the religious paradigm of "just have faith."

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Generally true but counseling your God who is the top is officially and scripturally discouraged.

Also most of the people who want to make things "better" are consciously or uncosciously trying to snuff out the divine spark in the church so listening to them would be idiotic. Like Churchill taking Hitler's advice into consideration while planning military strategy.

[bluebell]

10 minutes ago, ttribe said:

[SMH]  Wow.

That's great for you.  All three of my kids were recently diagnosed with a very serious illness. An illness that has destroyed my oldest son's (age 17) ability to graduate from high school.  An illness that also caused him to have to give himself weekly infusions of IGG for more than a year.  An illness that has caused my 10 year-old son to be out of school since Thanksgiving.  An illness that is causing a heart-breakingly obvious tic in my 8 year-old daughter that leaves her embarrassed and humiliated around her peers.  An illness that left us going out of pocket more than $30k in 2014 to treat (haven't added up 2015, yet).  In the midst of all this, my business partner suddenly decided to backtrack on our deal for him to retire and he threw me out of our firm.  My mother was recently diagnosed with breast cancer.  Our house was recently damaged to the tune of $12k due to a faulty water line to the ice maker in our refrigerator.  I'm not going to lie, I don't feel like these trials have been "blunted" at all for me and my family.  Why one family, and not the other?  If you begin following some of the doctrinal lines of reasoning (especially as they relate to promises associated with keeping certain commandments, for example) it's very easy to lead to very frightening conclusions; conclusions that have left me in some very dark places in my own head in the last few years.  Comments like those from Elder Oaks and being lightly bandied about in this thread don't help me.  Not at all.  I'm often left feeling worse for having attended Church and sitting through these types of discussions.

I am so sorry!  I won't pretend like i have any words of wisdom for you.

I can relate to some of the questions that you are asking yourself though.  While my family is having some hard trials, I have a close friend that is receiving the blessings that we need (and they don't).  It has been a huge struggle for me to understand that and not to feel unloved, envious, and just plain angry (and many times that's exactly how i've felt!).  But, i know about trials in that family that no one else but one or two people know of.  They are not visible from the outside, not even from pretty close inside as not even close extended family is aware of them.  You know what's really horrible?  It actually makes me feel a bit better to know that they have their own struggles (misery really does love company and i'm not proud that satan and i have that in common a lot of the time).  

One thing that keeps coming back to me was something i learned about while i was in elementary school.  I don't even remember the context but we learned about a boy named Roy L. Dennis, who was born with a horrible disease that caused pain and social ridicule for most of his life, before it finally killed him when he was 15 (if i'm remembering the age right.)

He was once asked by a doctor if he ever thought to himself "Why me?"  His answer was no, rather he asks himself "Why NOT me?"  

I do know, (and it's not much and it's not even something i know all the time) that the moments when i can truly submit myself to God (and channel Mosiah 3:19)-when I can have a "why not me" attitude (which isn't often)- those are the moments when i see His hand in my life.   Those are the only moments i can really see Him very clearly at all.

For me, that's been the difference between lines of reasoning leading to scary conclusions or hope and comfort.  I've experienced both and am sure i will continue to.  I do empathize with you on that point and I hope that both of us can find more hope and comfort in what we are facing.  

[RevTestament]

1 hour ago, Scott Lloyd said:

Was it just one attendee this time? I could only hear one person shouting on the broadcast, but I wondered if there were more.

We only attended the Sunday morning session, but I only heard one too.

[6EQUJ5]

4 hours ago, bluebell said:

I love the idea that God can help us suffer as little as possible, while still allowing for His will and free agency to prevail.  Making the hard things as easy as they can be without removing them all together (because making my children's lives all rainbows and butterflies would be my choice, but to their detriment) is one of my goals when trying to be a good parent.

Would you allow one of your children to starve to death while you took time to comfort the other over a scraped knee?

There is a lot of evil and pain in this world.  We know God loves us but we don't have to try and explain why allows what he does.  I don't understand it and until God reveals I don't think anyone will know why the world is the way it is.

[bluebell]

24 minutes ago, 6EQUJ5 said:

Would you allow one of your children to starve to death while you took time to comfort the other over a scraped knee?

There is a lot of evil and pain in this world.  We know God loves us but we don't have to try and explain why allows what he does.  I don't understand it and until God reveals I don't think anyone will know why the world is the way it is.

Death and suffering is different to God than it is to us, and He of course sees the end from the beginning while we can't even see into tomorrow. 

Because of all that and more, I agree that we can't know God's mind or reasons for every example of suffering. 

[JLHPROF]

3 minutes ago, bluebell said:

Death and suffering is different to God than it is to us, and He of course sees the end from the beginning while we can't even see into tomorrow. 

Because of all that and more, I agree that we can't know God's mind or reasons for every example of suffering. 

Very true.

Additionally, God is more concerned about our eternal well-being (his work being to bring to pass our immortality and eternal life).
Growing faith, responding to prayers of faith, and allowing us to use our faith through trials and sacrifice and suffering.

But mortal death is an unavoidable part of life that we all go through and God will decide when it is time for his children to return home and the method.  That is not cruel.

 

[Jeanne]

5 hours ago, ttribe said:

[SMH]  Wow.

That's great for you.  All three of my kids were recently diagnosed with a very serious illness. An illness that has destroyed my oldest son's (age 17) ability to graduate from high school.  An illness that also caused him to have to give himself weekly infusions of IGG for more than a year.  An illness that has caused my 10 year-old son to be out of school since Thanksgiving.  An illness that is causing a heart-breakingly obvious tic in my 8 year-old daughter that leaves her embarrassed and humiliated around her peers.  An illness that left us going out of pocket more than $30k in 2014 to treat (haven't added up 2015, yet).  In the midst of all this, my business partner suddenly decided to backtrack on our deal for him to retire and he threw me out of our firm.  My mother was recently diagnosed with breast cancer.  Our house was recently damaged to the tune of $12k due to a faulty water line to the ice maker in our refrigerator.  I'm not going to lie, I don't feel like these trials have been "blunted" at all for me and my family.  Why one family, and not the other?  If you begin following some of the doctrinal lines of reasoning (especially as they relate to promises associated with keeping certain commandments, for example) it's very easy to lead to very frightening conclusions; conclusions that have left me in some very dark places in my own head in the last few years.  Comments like those from Elder Oaks and being lightly bandied about in this thread don't help me.  Not at all.  I'm often left feeling worse for having attended Church and sitting through these types of discussions.

An internet hug for what you are going through.  I wish there was something I could do..is there?  Hope.  May it be with you and your loved ones and keep in mind that in your corner of the world there, you are surely loved,

[ttribe]

3 hours ago, Jeanne said:

An internet hug for what you are going through.  I wish there was something I could do..is there?  Hope.  May it be with you and your loved ones and keep in mind that in your corner of the world there, you are surely loved,

Thanks, Jeanne.  I appreciate the kind words.  There's really nothing anyone can do.  My wife is quarterbacking the coordination of doctors now and we seem to be moving in the right direction.  It's slow going, but there has been some progress.  It's just brutal to watch one, or more, of my kids suffer like this every single day.

Edited April 5, 2016 by ttribe

[flameburns623]

10 hours ago, consiglieri said:

I have a problem believing in a God who "blunts" terrorist attacks but does not prevent them.

Or a God who is so busy protecting LDS missionaries during the blast that he overlooks the safety of non-Mormons at the airport.

How do you come to call yourself a Latter-Day Saint with such a myopic, short-sided view of existence? As if the mortal realm is the only existence there is?

Even New Ager Richard Bach had a broader perspective on suffering than you. From his book Illusions: The Adventures of a Reluctant Messiah:

The mark of your ignorance is the depth of your belief in injustice and tragedy. What the caterpillar calls the end of the world, the master calls a butterfly.

You're going to die a horrible death, remember. It's all good training, and you'll enjoy it more if you keep the facts in mind.

Take your dying with some seriousness, however. Laughing on the way to your execution is not generally understood by less advanced lifeforms, and they'll call you crazy.

Edited April 5, 2016 by flameburns623