conference

[Five Solas]

1 hour ago, Robert F. Smith said:

... I'd rather listen to Victoria Osteen hold forth on more important issues...

Not that I'm a huge fan, but why you hatin' on Victoria Osteen, Robert F. Smith?  If the repeated shutdown of "alt-right" related Mormon threads on this forum is any indication, Osteen's large multi-ethnic audience is downright aspirational for LDS (or at least it is for the mods). 

Perhaps if you try hard enough, you can find something nice to say...

;0)

--Erik

[bluebell]

2 minutes ago, Meadowchik said:

It fits the presentation, which is what I was referring to. I was not referring to peoples' individual convictions.

I do not think I contradicted myself but I understand if you found it hurtful and I am sorry I was hurtful.

You think describing General Conference as a presentation (a presentation which is comprised almost entirely of people's individual convictions) meant to 'control or influence cleverly, unfairly, or unscrupulously fits?  And you think describing it that way is charitable?   I don't find your words hurtful but I do find them confusing.

You've paid lip service to ideas of the sacredness of people's sincere convictions and charity in dealing with competing claims, but you don't seem to really mean it when the rubber meets the road (so to speak).  I'm trying to understand if i've misunderstood you, or if your beliefs and actions on the topic are actually that out of sync with each other.   

 

[bluebell]

10 minutes ago, Five Solas said:

Not that I'm a huge fan, but why you hatin' on Victoria Osteen, Robert F. Smith?  If the repeated shutdown of "alt-right" related Mormon threads on this forum is any indication, Osteen's large multi-ethnic audience is downright aspirational for LDS (or at least it is for the mods). 

Perhaps if you try hard enough, you can find something nice to say...

;0)

--Erik

Why are you assuming he's being unkind?  He said this in a previous post-

I love to watch great preachers, such as Billy Graham (his old sermons still available on Youtube), or Joel and Victoria Osteen (Lakewood Church in Houston).  They are every bit as "manipulative" as any LDS speaker, and perhaps moreso, but I don't take umbrage -- instead appreciating that they are true believers in their specific tradition.  I always feel that I can learn something from them, as from many other religious traditions, Christian and non-Christian.

 

[Meadowchik]

Just now, bluebell said:

You think describing General Conference as a presentation (a presentation which is comprised almost entirely of people's individual convictions) meant to 'control or influence cleverly, unfairly, or unscrupulously fits?  And you think describing it that way is charitable?   I don't find your words hurtful but I do find them confusing.

You've paid lip service to ideas of the sacredness of people's sincere convictions and charity in dealing with competing claims, but you don't seem to really mean it when the rubber meets the road (so to speak).  I'm trying to understand if i've misunderstood you, or if your beliefs and actions on the topic are actually that out of sync with each other.   

 

Consider this: it is possible to consider a whole organisation and its conference as different from the experience and consciousness of individual members. And collective behavior is not the same as individual behavior.

Example: Fifty people watch a crime occur on their street, no one intervenes or calls police. It is a bad collective behavior but hypothetically each person could be acting innocently.

This should be familiar to you, given your study of history, right?

[Five Solas]

5 minutes ago, bluebell said:

Why are you assuming he's being unkind?  He said this in a previous post-

I love to watch great preachers, such as Billy Graham (his old sermons still available on Youtube), or Joel and Victoria Osteen (Lakewood Church in Houston).  They are every bit as "manipulative" as any LDS speaker, and perhaps moreso, but I don't take umbrage -- instead appreciating that they are true believers in their specific tradition.  I always feel that I can learn something from them, as from many other religious traditions, Christian and non-Christian.

 

Because he said she was preferable to "folderol" (look it up if you need to).  If that's your idea of being kind, well then--you win.

--Erik

[Stargazer]

On 3/31/2017 at 0:58 PM, Ouagadougou said:

Not really...are they really going to proclaim/say anything that we haven't heard 1000 times already?

Nah.  

But then again, I've watched the Lord of the Rings trilogy several times (Extended Edition for the win!), and I love it every time!  I keep hoping that Frodo will finally toss that darn ring into the Pit of Doom (or whatever it's called) without Gollum's having to bite off his finger!  But it's the same thing every time.  Sigh.  Still enjoy it!

I heard a good tale this morning!  J. Monte Brough (counselor in the Young Men's Presidency) told about his father disciplining him, and his grandmother commenting that she thought he was being too harsh.  His father responded that he would discipline his children as HE saw fit, only to have his grandmother respond to his father "So will I!"  It gave me a chuckle.

[bluebell]

5 minutes ago, Meadowchik said:

Consider this: it is possible to consider a whole organisation and its conference as different from the experience and consciousness of individual members. And collective behavior is not the same as individual behavior.

Example: Fifty people watch a crime occur on their street, no one intervenes or calls police. It is a bad collective behavior but hypothetically each person could be acting innocently.

This should be familiar to you, given your study of history, right?

If those 50 people walked up individually and interacted with the criminal personally, could it accurately be called collective behavior?

Conference is a presentation comprised of people individually walking up to the podium and personally testifying of what they believe.  

[Tacenda]

On 3/31/2017 at 1:45 PM, stemelbow said:

Can't wait for the annual statistical report. 

So has the membership decreased at all, or stakes or wards? I haven't a clue what it was last year.

[bluebell]

10 minutes ago, Five Solas said:

Because he said she was preferable to "folderol" (look it up if you need to).  If that's your idea of being kind, well then--you win.

--Erik

Yes, and given what he had said previously about her, it's clear that he was paying her a compliment.   How is saying that he'd rather listen to a specific religious person than listen to a trivial and nonsensical discussion about politics, unkind anyway?  There's nothing mean about that statement.   It's not even snarky.

[BlueDreams]

1 hour ago, Meadowchik said:

It fits the presentation, which is what I was referring to. I was not referring to peoples' individual convictions.

I do not think I contradicted myself but I understand if you found it hurtful and I am sorry I was hurtful.

I think it's more about conflictual word and using things that are by far non-objective terms, but value laden. Advocating or even promoting a position is more neutral. Manipulative has both a negative connotation and is misapplied. By your use and context from what I read, I manipulate people daily for my job. I do not take their stance as a given but work from some of my perspectives and work to convince them of a new perspective and outlook.  Sometimes I do so in subtle suggestions, confronting certain beliefs, and reframing to what I feel are more positive bends. It's coming from my perconceived notions about health, inherent human worth, and the value of certain human experiences. And I move for those and in those convictions. 

AKA manipulative....or therapy. Whichever  

 

With luv,

BD 

Edited April 2, 2017 by BlueDreams

[Robert F. Smith]

1 hour ago, Five Solas said:

Not that I'm a huge fan, but why you hatin' on Victoria Osteen, Robert F. Smith?  If the repeated shutdown of "alt-right" related Mormon threads on this forum is any indication, Osteen's large multi-ethnic audience is downright aspirational for LDS (or at least it is for the mods). 

Perhaps if you try hard enough, you can find something nice to say...

;0)

--Erik

Glad to see that you agree that Victoria is wonderful, and that the Lakewood Church presents an object lesson for us all.  I have been admiring Joel and Victoria for many years now -- even if a number of traditional Protestant ministers find fault with them.

[Robert F. Smith]

2 hours ago, mrmarklin said:

I didn't want to get political, but Reid was the worst leader of the senate in my living memory. No integrity at all. 

Yeh, a lot of hate has been directed at Harry Reid over the years, and some of it is related to his hard scrabble origins and political life-style, which is to be expected in a Senator from Nevada.  The Democrats liked him because he was an effective leader and got things done.  The Republicans hated him for the same reason.

[Okrahomer]

2 hours ago, Tacenda said:

So has the membership decreased at all, or stakes or wards? I haven't a clue what it was last year.

At the end of 2016, there were:

15,882,417 members, which is an increase of 242,218.

3,266 Stakes, which was an increase of 92.

30,304 Wards and Branches, which was an increase of 288.

240,131 Convert baptisms, which was a decrease of 17,271.
                
109,246 New children of record, which was a decrease of 5,304.
                
70,946 Full time missionaries, which was a decrease of 3,133.
                
33,695 Church Service missionaries, which was an increase of 1,916.

[Rain]

 

 

6 hours ago, Tacenda said:

I've always listened to conference, I listen more intently now with my faith transition. I admit I do want to listen more just to see if they address the problems in the church. This morning I started listening but it was just more of the same. But will maybe listen on the internet later to see if it's any better and I'm not so negative. But do want to listen even more than I did before, before it was a feeling that I better do it because I'm told to, now I listen for other reasons.

That's too bad.  Add I was listening there was a part that I was thinking could help you bring some peace.  Unfortunately I don't have any memory as to what was being said or who said it.  Just thought of you and had the impression it could give you peace. 

[Rain]

8 hours ago, Meadowchik said:

Going as an outsider or even objective observer to General Conference, it is inherently manipulative: the entire social construct of the experience relies on the premise that the church is true. This is the case for a multitude of other promotional presentations.

I've always thought of it as instructive rather than promotional.  If it was promotional there would be a lot better ways to do that and I've seen the church has that ability if they wanted to. 

Edited April 2, 2017 by Rain

[Okrahomer]

1 hour ago, Robert F. Smith said:

Glad to see that you agree that Victoria is wonderful, and that the Lakewood Church presents an object lesson for us all.  I have been admiring Joel and Victoria for many years now -- even if a number of traditional Protestant ministers find fault with them.

I admire the Osteens for taking some heat from certain quarters for acknowledging that Mormons are Christians.

Edited April 2, 2017 by Okrahomer

[Five Solas]

1 hour ago, Robert F. Smith said:

Glad to see that you agree that Victoria is wonderful, and that the Lakewood Church presents an object lesson for us all...

Yeah, that's not exactly what I agreed to.  Meanwhile you've got bluebell arguing your posts are devoid of snark on the subject of Victoria Osteen.  Her check's in the mail, right?

;0)

--Erik

[BlueDreams]

7 hours ago, Tacenda said:

I've always listened to conference, I listen more intently now with my faith transition. I admit I do want to listen more just to see if they address the problems in the church. This morning I started listening but it was just more of the same. But will maybe listen on the internet later to see if it's any better and I'm not so negative. But do want to listen even more than I did before, before it was a feeling that I better do it because I'm told to, now I listen for other reasons.

I really enjoyed both sessions so far. I have a tendency to not be able to tell you what the talks are really about, because I was more focused on finding things that I need. It gets awkward when people are quoting talks and I'm wondering if I was even at the same session ! I'm just not a big quote person. But I saw this comment and thought you may really like second session, particularly. Again, it could be just what I was focusing and needing for my own person struggles right now, but several IMO were focused heavily on Christ. Holland's was also very good. Overall I've been content with what I've received. But maybe it'll be better for you at a different time  

 

With luv,

BD

Edited April 2, 2017 by BlueDreams

[mfbukowski]

3 hours ago, Meadowchik said:

I reject the nihilizing of objectivity. Even if my whole life could be a dream, I will live as if it isn't, and even if freewill could be an illusion, I will choose as if choosing matters. And within those subjective paradigms of mine, I will endeavor to approach objectivity. 

And so we can dispense with the semantics and get back to what is already understood

Thanks for the well wishes!

Listen to yourself!  You are affirming that your "objectivity" is subjective and the difference is semantic, to get back to your previous prejudices which are "already understood".

That's fine- we agree, and that shows you to be an honest person who understands herself.   It's all subjective.  We live our lives "as if" our beliefs are "true" whatever that means.  And if you want to define "objectivity" in your subjective way, go for it but just know what you are doing.  It is what we all do.  Reject it all you like- it is inescapable because we all have needs and a point of view.  If we were all identical maybe "objectivity" would be possible, but we are not, and we all have different psychological needs.

Anyway, I am glad we agree at last, and again my best wishes, I hope you find true happiness. 

 

[JAHS]

I was pleasantly surprised that President Monson spoke in Priesthood session. It was short but he got through it OK.

[Tacenda]

1 hour ago, Rain said:

 

 

That's too bad.  Add I was listening there was a part that I was thinking could help you bring some peace.  Unfortunately I don't have any memory as to what was being said or who said it.  Just thought of you and had the impression it could give you peace. 

I was only able to listen to one speaker all the way through, Pres. Eyring. But have read that Pres. Holland's talk was a good one, from many on the fringe. And they were glad to hear that they're still welcome, but that they wished their local leadership felt the same, for some of them.

Could it be that talk Rain? And thanks for thinking of me.

[Rain]

43 minutes ago, Tacenda said:

I was only able to listen to one speaker all the way through, Pres. Eyring. But have read that Pres. Holland's talk was a good one, from many on the fringe. And they were glad to hear that they're still welcome, but that they wished their local leadership felt the same, for some of them.

Could it be that talk Rain? And thanks for thinking of me.

Maybe. It seems not though. I do remember thinking of Stembelow with that one. I probably shouldn't have said anything since I can't remember. 

[Meadowchik]

6 hours ago, bluebell said:

If those 50 people walked up individually and interacted with the criminal personally, could it accurately be called collective behavior?

Conference is a presentation comprised of people individually walking up to the podium and personally testifying of what they believe.  

It's much more that that. 

But, anyway. I'd rather not bicker.

Edited April 2, 2017 by Meadowchik

[Meadowchik]

3 hours ago, mfbukowski said:

Listen to yourself!  You are affirming that your "objectivity" is subjective and the difference is semantic, to get back to your previous prejudices which are "already understood".

That's fine- we agree, and that shows you to be an honest person who understands herself.   It's all subjective.  We live our lives "as if" our beliefs are "true" whatever that means.  And if you want to define "objectivity" in your subjective way, go for it but just know what you are doing.  It is what we all do.  Reject it all you like- it is inescapable because we all have needs and a point of view.  If we were all identical maybe "objectivity" would be possible, but we are not, and we all have different psychological needs.

Anyway, I am glad we agree at last, and again my best wishes, I hope you find true happiness. 

 

Well I'm glad you feel better, at least.

[VideoGameJunkie]

Where can I watch the priesthood session talks? It's not posted on the church website yet.