SeekingUnderstanding Posted February 7, 2018 Posted February 7, 2018 (edited) 40 minutes ago, Hamba Tuhan said: Have you actually read what I've posted above? Is that really enough to make you happy about leaving? Hamba, You know you are right. I almost always enjoy your posts as you provide a unique persective from a different side of the world. I feel bad lumping you in with Scott and Kiwi. Your comment: "My impression after reading this thread is that this is at least one aspect of what people mean when they use the word 'inclusive': he said something that didn't make me feel bad about leaving." is very off putting. It doesn't reflect how I feel about Elder Uchtdorf's talk (and it was my posts and Scott's reaction to them that generated your post), nor do I think it represents most "progressive" Mormons. The condescending judgement of members who pretend to know what you are really thinking and feeling (you just like Uchtdorf cause he makes you not feel bad about leaving), remind me of the worst parts of Mormonism and yes make me glad that I am out. Thanks, John ETA - Please note I know that condescension and judgement are a two way street and aren't unique to Mormonism. And it's often hard to argue from a position of good faith on an internet discussion board. Edited February 7, 2018 by SeekingUnderstanding 2
SeekingUnderstanding Posted February 7, 2018 Posted February 7, 2018 (edited) 30 minutes ago, kiwi57 said: That was a cheap shot, SU. nevermind... Don't want to continue dereail Edited February 7, 2018 by SeekingUnderstanding
kiwi57 Posted February 7, 2018 Author Posted February 7, 2018 3 minutes ago, SeekingUnderstanding said: No cheaper than telling me why I and others like me really like Elder Uchtdorf's quote. I told you that? Where? 3 minutes ago, SeekingUnderstanding said: I can honestly say that nearly every post of yours I read as an active, struggling member of the church helped push me out... Not that I was the kind of member you would have wanted in your gospel tent... You really don't know me, do you? Perhaps if you'd sought a little more understanding, you might have gained some.
clarkgoble Posted February 7, 2018 Posted February 7, 2018 5 hours ago, Jeanne said: There is always a voice that speaks to all people and it is a talent..personality or otherwise..Uchtdorf has this. It is not that he is really any different than other apostles..except he is real in the way he speaks..and with empathy/understanding of so many. This, I think is where other apostles need to challenge themselves..to be speak a truth of their own feelings..then let the spirit speak to them to discern if it is right. Maybe God has something to teach them..but they need to try..not stick to the same old..same old...this church needs to grow..if not by numbers..then by the very core of Jesus's teachings. I'm not sure I'd agree he's more real in how he speaks. Rather he speaks a language that many feel more comfortable who feel separated from the language most other Mormons are more comfortable with. That is I think we're seeing more a linguistic divergence within out culture particularly with progressive Mormons. But I honestly think Uchtdorf is saying exactly what apostles have been saying for quite some time. Don't get me wrong. I love Elder Uchtdorf's talks. But they really are anything but new more "more" truthful. I think this is in turn part of a large divergence culturally in the US. (Although also significantly more so in Canada and Europe which is why I suspect Uchtdorf can tap into this - although most Canadian Mormons are tied to Alberta Mormons which culturally are more like Utah Mormons) Now where I think you're completely right is that I think for the Church to continue to grow we need to embrace this differing way of talking to adapt to these cultural changes. Contra many, I think the Nones are largely a nominal change and think these linguistic shifts are very much a part of many of their dissatisfaction with organized religion. However about half of those in the "nothing at all" category of the Nones shift back into Christianity. So I think this remains a very potent place to find people who'd accept the gospel. But we have to change how we talk which is still caught up in a mid century set of rhetoric and concerns. 6 hours ago, ALarson said: I agree. I think it's more of a sense or just a feeling one gets when he's speaking vs. maybe when some of the other leaders speak. It's not even always the words that are spoken, but just an impression. That's almost certainly a sense of style though with some feeling more comfortable with a style than others. It's hard because as our nation bifurcates significantly socially this is going to be a bigger tension. You have the majority of members who like the way we speak and then those who don't. There actually were some similar tensions in the 80's when I was young as society had changed radically particularly for the interests of women and ways of speaking. This shift is much more broad. It'll be interesting to see what happens since within a given ward you're not apt to have people be willing to shift languages as much. But if you can have a few leaders speak both languages that may be enough. As I said I don't think any people who prefer the more traditional focus and talks will object to people focusing or speaking as Uchtdorf does. (I'll fully admit I prefer Elder Oaks' talks but I really like Uchtdorfs as well) 4
SeekingUnderstanding Posted February 7, 2018 Posted February 7, 2018 (edited) 18 minutes ago, kiwi57 said: I told you that? Where? You really don't know me, do you? Perhaps if you'd sought a little more understanding, you might have gained some. I guess you got in before I deleted. If I recall correctly, your posting style which I have always found very off putting, has gotten you banned twice here? Anyway I am bowing out as I don’t wish to be banned myself. Edited February 7, 2018 by SeekingUnderstanding
Scott Lloyd Posted February 7, 2018 Posted February 7, 2018 (edited) 1 hour ago, ttribe said: It was? That's news to me! ALarson said essentially the same thing, and he said it directly to me. It appeared to me you were joining in with him. I guess I was mistaken in that impression. The fact of the matter is, I too am fond of Elder Uchtdorf, I dare say as much as anyone here. My fondness was enhanced last summer when I had the opportunity to interact with him at the dedication of the Tucson Arizona Temple and enjoyed what was to me the very sacred privilege to interview him in the foyer of the new temple the day before the dedication. There's no reason in the world that I should feel resentful or threatened by the fact that a lot of other people are fond of him as well. If anything, I can relate to that. What I don't care for is to see him pressed into service or his sermons co-opted to push some ideological view or another. Which is why it resonated with me when Kiwi started this thread. Edited February 7, 2018 by Scott Lloyd 2
Scott Lloyd Posted February 7, 2018 Posted February 7, 2018 (edited) 52 minutes ago, SeekingUnderstanding said: Hamba, You know you are right. I almost always enjoy your posts as you provide a unique persective from a different side of the world. I feel bad lumping you in with Scott and Kiwi. I feel greater affinity with Hamba's expressed views than I do those of most of the people on this board. So, in my case at least, geographic distance and locale don't make a great deal of difference. Edited February 7, 2018 by Scott Lloyd
Tacenda Posted February 7, 2018 Posted February 7, 2018 2 hours ago, kiwi57 said: Perhaps instead of choosing to take offense at whatever President Oaks has said that you don't like, you might try reading it for understanding. If I didn't read it, how would I know I didn't like what he said?
sunstoned Posted February 7, 2018 Posted February 7, 2018 23 hours ago, Scott Lloyd said: If by this you mean to imply that Elder Uchtdorf strips away all that gives Mormonism its uniqueness and instead subscribes to what might be viewed as a generic conception of Christianity as reflected in the New Testament, discounting all other volumes of scripture, I think you would have a tough time getting him to agree to that characterization. Or perhaps I'm misunderstanding you. You are reading a lot into my post that I didn't write. You are misunderstanding me.
sunstoned Posted February 7, 2018 Posted February 7, 2018 23 hours ago, Scott Lloyd said: If by this you mean to imply that Elder Uchtdorf strips away all that gives Mormonism its uniqueness and instead subscribes to what might be viewed as a generic conception of Christianity as reflected in the New Testament, discounting all other volumes of scripture, I think you would have a tough time getting him to agree to that characterization. Or perhaps I'm misunderstanding you. I did not imply anything, and you are off base. I did not even use the term "mormonism" in my post.
Scott Lloyd Posted February 7, 2018 Posted February 7, 2018 11 minutes ago, Tacenda said: If I didn't read it, how would I know I didn't like what he said? I think what Kiwi means is that reading is not necessarily the same as reading for understanding.
ALarson Posted February 7, 2018 Posted February 7, 2018 10 hours ago, clarkgoble said: That's almost certainly a sense of style though with some feeling more comfortable with a style than others. It's hard because as our nation bifurcates significantly socially this is going to be a bigger tension. You have the majority of members who like the way we speak and then those who don't. There actually were some similar tensions in the 80's when I was young as society had changed radically particularly for the interests of women and ways of speaking. This shift is much more broad. It'll be interesting to see what happens since within a given ward you're not apt to have people be willing to shift languages as much. But if you can have a few leaders speak both languages that may be enough. As I said I don't think any people who prefer the more traditional focus and talks will object to people focusing or speaking as Uchtdorf does. I agree. As I've already expressed here, the members respond not only to what Elder Uchtdorf says, but there is a just a warmth and love that emanates from him. He's dearly loved and members want to hear him speak. He does give off the spirit of unconditional love and inclusion. Quote (I'll fully admit I prefer Elder Oaks' talks but I really like Uchtdorfs as well) I don't have a problem with anyone stating that (which is why I don't understand some of the reactions here to those expressing their feelings for Elder Uchtdorf'). Members have always had their favorites when it comes to listening to GC speakers, etc. How many times have we heard someone say (when a speaker is announced) "Oh good! He's my favorite speaker!" or "One of my favorites!"). That's just normal when there are such a variety of personalities and styles of speech. 1
Scott Lloyd Posted February 7, 2018 Posted February 7, 2018 1 hour ago, ALarson said: I don't have a problem with anyone stating that (which is why I don't understand some of the reactions here to those expressing their feelings for Elder Uchtdorf'). Such as?
Tacenda Posted February 7, 2018 Posted February 7, 2018 11 hours ago, Scott Lloyd said: I think what Kiwi means is that reading is not necessarily the same as reading for understanding. Scott, how would you know if I didn't read for understanding? Or Kiwi?
Scott Lloyd Posted February 7, 2018 Posted February 7, 2018 6 minutes ago, Tacenda said: Scott, how would you know if I didn't read for understanding? Or Kiwi? You said, "If I didn't read. ..." Kiwi used the phrase "read for understanding." I was merely pointing out the difference. Kiwi can speak for himself, but I understood him to suggest that if you are taking offense at what Elder Oaks said, perhaps you didn't understand him. I think that sort of thing happens a lot. 2
Jeanne Posted February 7, 2018 Posted February 7, 2018 3 hours ago, Tacenda said: Scott, how would you know if I didn't read for understanding? Or Kiwi?
Scott Lloyd Posted February 7, 2018 Posted February 7, 2018 15 hours ago, sunstoned said: You are reading a lot into my post that I didn't write. You are misunderstanding me. Which is why I implicitly invited clarification.
kiwi57 Posted February 7, 2018 Author Posted February 7, 2018 5 hours ago, Tacenda said: Scott, how would you know if I didn't read for understanding? Or Kiwi? Because if you like Elder Uchtdorf, and you understand what President Oaks actually said (as opposed to what others choose to get up in arms about) you'll find that they are on the same page about everything that matters. 1
Tacenda Posted February 7, 2018 Posted February 7, 2018 1 hour ago, kiwi57 said: Because if you like Elder Uchtdorf, and you understand what President Oaks actually said (as opposed to what others choose to get up in arms about) you'll find that they are on the same page about everything that matters. Has Elder Uchtdorf spoken on gay issues? I'm not sure that he has. But I've read a few talks by Pres. Oaks that has, and in his opinion they will not progress to live with heavenly father if they act on it. Or become married, nor will their family unless they denounce their parents union.
ttribe Posted February 7, 2018 Posted February 7, 2018 6 minutes ago, Tacenda said: Has Elder Uchtdorf spoken on gay issues? I'm not sure that he has. But I've read a few talks by Pres. Oaks that has, and in his opinion they will not progress to live with heavenly father if they act on it. Or become married, nor will their family unless they denounce their parents union. I'm pretty confident Elder Uchtdorf shares these same views.
kiwi57 Posted February 7, 2018 Author Posted February 7, 2018 8 hours ago, ALarson said: I agree. As I've already expressed here, the members respond not only to what Elder Uchtdorf says, but there is a just a warmth and love that emanates from him. He's dearly loved and members want to hear him speak. He does give off the spirit of unconditional love and inclusion. I don't have a problem with anyone stating that (which is why I don't understand some of the reactions here to those expressing their feelings for Elder Uchtdorf'). Whose reactions, and what were they? I don't get what you're talking about. 1
Calm Posted February 7, 2018 Posted February 7, 2018 18 minutes ago, Tacenda said: Has Elder Uchtdorf spoken on gay issues? I'm not sure that he has. But I've read a few talks by Pres. Oaks that has, and in his opinion they will not progress to live with heavenly father if they act on it. Or become married, nor will their family unless they denounce their parents union. If they don't repent or recognize God's commandments at sometime in the future.
kiwi57 Posted February 7, 2018 Author Posted February 7, 2018 17 minutes ago, Tacenda said: Has Elder Uchtdorf spoken on gay issues? I'm not sure that he has. But I've read a few talks by Pres. Oaks that has, and in his opinion they will not progress to live with heavenly father if they act on it. Or become married, nor will their family unless they denounce their parents union. And do you have sound doctrinal and/or scriptural reasons to think that he's wrong? Let's not turn this into yet another of the plethora of gay threads on the board. Why don't you start a thread discussing the particular talk(s) you have in mind?
Tacenda Posted February 7, 2018 Posted February 7, 2018 9 minutes ago, kiwi57 said: And do you have sound doctrinal and/or scriptural reasons to think that he's wrong? Let's not turn this into yet another of the plethora of gay threads on the board. Why don't you start a thread discussing the particular talk(s) you have in mind? http://www.ldsliving.com/Pres-Uchtdorf-weighs-in-on-same-sex-attraction/s/62556 I am in keeping with the topic.
kiwi57 Posted February 7, 2018 Author Posted February 7, 2018 22 hours ago, SeekingUnderstanding said: Had you said, "I infer from his account that he at least has succeeded in many cases to get people to return" rather than " by his own account at least has succeeded in many cases to get people to return." then sure. Agree to disagree. I don't think he implied any such thing but whatever. Also would have helped if you left the snide personal remark off... (Emphasis added by me.) I wonder why pots and kettles come to mind...
Recommended Posts