Refusing To Do The 10-Day Social Media Fast

[mnn727]

22 hours ago, stemelbow said:

 That feels personal and condemning to me. 

More feelings -- I'm get sick of everyones "feelings" especially those who not involved in the actual problem. People are getting addicted to being outraged about things that have little or no bearing on them or in this case over a Prophets SUGGESTION. 
God forbid that they take time to consider why they are so outraged by it.

 

and yes, this is as much about general society in the U.S. today as about this thread.

Edited October 10, 2018 by mnn727

[mnn727]

8 hours ago, The Nehor said:

Who would have thought we would come up with a way of making the (admittedly overblown) cream strippings story seem lucid and rational by comparison.

Post of the Week!

[HappyJackWagon]

1 hour ago, mnn727 said:

More feelings -- I'm get sick of everyones "feelings" especially those who not involved in the actual problem. People are getting addicted to being outraged about things that have little or no bearing on them or in this case over a Prophets SUGGESTION. 
God forbid that they take time to consider why they are so outraged by it.

 

and yes, this is as much about general society in the U.S. today as about this thread.

Too many feelings!!!!!

I wish everyone would just keep all of their feelings to themselves. They have no place in conversation  

Are you assuming that because someone expresses a feeling they haven't taken time to consider why they are experiencing that feeling?

[BlueDreams]

1 hour ago, rockpond said:

I feel that each sister (and each member) needs to use some amount of personal judgment in taking on Pres. Nelson’s social media fast challenge.  I’ll share my thoughts and I’m curious if others here think I’m off base. 

It seems to me that his concern is with the “fakeness” of social media.  People only sharing the glossy images of their lives and making viewers/readers feel that their lives are somehow less. 

I am on board with that concern. 

But social media is more than that...

For some, social media is their primary source of news. For others, it is a marketing tool and relationship building tool for their occupation.   Certainly he isn’t asking people to stop promoting their businesses for 10 days, is he?

The there is the question of how to define “social media”.  My wife asked me that question last night.  She uses GroupMe with a group of friends to easily communicate with one another.  Is that social media?

We has a similar debate with my son after President Nelson’s challenge to youth this past summer.  My son uses the discord server to communicate wii his friends.  Is that social media?

My childrens’ schools use Facebook and Twitter to communicate with parents.  Do we need to stay away from those for 10 days?

Our ward has a Facebook page used to share and make announcements.  Is that off limits for the duration of the fast?

I use linked in for work... social media?

How about this site?  In what ways are these forums substantially different than social media?

I’m not asking for answers to the above specifics... just saying that it seems to me, each person needs to look at the spirit of Pres. Nelson’s request and do what is needed to fulfill it in their lives. 

I think most are. You can read some of my previous posts that are only one page back to get some idea what I'm thinking in prepping for my fast. Personally, I'm trying to do it with intention as well....as in thinking specifically of a blessing or two that I want out of this. Mine is mainly to have time and energy to do the things that I've been wanting to do for months but that seem to have little time to do so....to regain balance. Some of those who likely went on a complete cut likely have little immediate need that would be effected in 10 days. Even those that did often still took conscientious thought about what media was good in their life (like apps that allow them to talk to relatives or friends that aren't nearby, or limits that allow them to still run their business) and allowing them to get on board later. 

I'll have to re-listen to Nelson's talk...but I don't think fakeness needs be the only concern.

Let's go on one of the concerns that you mentioned: the news. Having social media as one's main news source is becoming a social problem, not a benefit. Social media doesn't filter false news reports, they often cater to the social and political leanings that the individual begins to exude or show on social media/searches. What this is leading to is catering to partisanship and making it less and less likely that one will hear from people outside their worldview. That's a problem. 

I think some of the hullabaloo that comes from this, is simply the amount of time and dependence people have started to have on media for entertainment and time fillers. I've suggested this change before to clients because it's eating into their relationship....and unless they've thought about it themselves, there is often a high level of resistance (there's often resistance even if they organically thought of it). They would literally choose scrolling social media, video games, etc over having space to work and enrich their marriage. To me that says we have a problem. It's not the end of the world to let go of media for 10 days. I let go of FB for several months after an emotional disruption, only checking it occasionally for events that may be happening with close friends. Nothing bad happened. My world didn't implode in the least. In someways the quiet of social noise was relaxing and refreshing. I think there's a deep need to reconnect with the world right in front of us and to regain balance in this space. And to me, that's what Nelson's invitation may represent.

 

With luv,

BD

[Rain]

2 hours ago, rockpond said:

I feel that each sister (and each member) needs to use some amount of personal judgment in taking on Pres. Nelson’s social media fast challenge.  I’ll share my thoughts and I’m curious if others here think I’m off base. 

It seems to me that his concern is with the “fakeness” of social media.  People only sharing the glossy images of their lives and making viewers/readers feel that their lives are somehow less. 

I am on board with that concern. 

But social media is more than that...

For some, social media is their primary source of news. For others, it is a marketing tool and relationship building tool for their occupation.   Certainly he isn’t asking people to stop promoting their businesses for 10 days, is he?

The there is the question of how to define “social media”.  My wife asked me that question last night.  She uses GroupMe with a group of friends to easily communicate with one another.  Is that social media?

We has a similar debate with my son after President Nelson’s challenge to youth this past summer.  My son uses the discord server to communicate wii his friends.  Is that social media?

My childrens’ schools use Facebook and Twitter to communicate with parents.  Do we need to stay away from those for 10 days?

Our ward has a Facebook page used to share and make announcements.  Is that off limits for the duration of the fast?

I use linked in for work... social media?

How about this site?  In what ways are these forums substantially different than social media?

I’m not asking for answers to the above specifics... just saying that it seems to me, each person needs to look at the spirit of Pres. Nelson’s request and do what is needed to fulfill it in their lives. 

I'm sure there are probably some or maybe even many that didn't think about it, just as there are probably some or maybe even many that were complaining about it before thinking it through. 

What I'm finding though is that those who jumped without thinking and being prayerful are often those that may most benefit from a break. The same goes for those that are not doing it out of protest.

Most of those I know have been thoughtful about it. A mother of a marching band student is waiting till the season is over. The social media person for a charity will continue posting for the charity, but will let go of it in other places. Duncan will do it on nonconsecutive days in the year 2027. 

Some may only check ward facebook pages. Some will read only positive blogs.

Right now I use GroupMe to connect with my family across the US and to arrange things in the organization I am in. Totally different purposes than some may use them for so they may drop the app for 10 days.

Really though, I think if it is a real problem to be off social media then faithful women will be considering what they should be doing and if it isn't then they really don't need to worry. 

[rockpond]

20 minutes ago, BlueDreams said:

I think most are. You can read some of my previous posts that are only one page back to get some idea what I'm thinking in prepping for my fast. Personally, I'm trying to do it with intention as well....as in thinking specifically of a blessing or two that I want out of this. Mine is mainly to have time and energy to do the things that I've been wanting to do for months but that seem to have little time to do so....to regain balance. Some of those who likely went on a complete cut likely have little immediate need that would be effected in 10 days. Even those that did often still took conscientious thought about what media was good in their life (like apps that allow them to talk to relatives or friends that aren't nearby, or limits that allow them to still run their business) and allowing them to get on board later. 

I'll have to re-listen to Nelson's talk...but I don't think fakeness needs be the only concern.

Let's go on one of the concerns that you mentioned: the news. Having social media as one's main news source is becoming a social problem, not a benefit. Social media doesn't filter false news reports, they often cater to the social and political leanings that the individual begins to exude or show on social media/searches. What this is leading to is catering to partisanship and making it less and less likely that one will hear from people outside their worldview. That's a problem. 

I think some of the hullabaloo that comes from this, is simply the amount of time and dependence people have started to have on media for entertainment and time fillers. I've suggested this change before to clients because it's eating into their relationship....and unless they've thought about it themselves, there is often a high level of resistance (there's often resistance even if they organically thought of it). They would literally choose scrolling social media, video games, etc over having space to work and enrich their marriage. To me that says we have a problem. It's not the end of the world to let go of media for 10 days. I let go of FB for several months after an emotional disruption, only checking it occasionally for events that may be happening with close friends. Nothing bad happened. My world didn't implode in the least. In someways the quiet of social noise was relaxing and refreshing. I think there's a deep need to reconnect with the world right in front of us and to regain balance in this space. And to me, that's what Nelson's invitation may represent.

 

With luv,

BD

Thanks for responding... and the good feedback.

Regarding social media as one's news source -- you make a good point.  It isn't necessarily the best choice for one's news, but it may not be the worse either.  I think these days we have to be very intentional about where we get our news.  I'm gonna get in trouble for typing this but it's true so I'll share it:  My wife's car has satellite radio.  She has been in the habit of listening to the Fox News station each time she is in the car.  But she recently noted that Fox News tends to endlessly drill on one particular news story, examining it to death, as if nothing else is happening in the world.  She decided she had to find a new source for her news.  I think the same can be said for many of these 24/7 news outlets.  In short, I'm not willing to say any one source is bad or good (including social media) but I think in this era it is on each of us to carefully and considerately curate how news flows into our lives.  But to President Nelson's point -- probably won't harm anyone giving up social media for 10 days (or more).

And to your final point:  I agree... the proposed fast is likely to make people (who do it) reevaluate the amount of time they spend/waste? on social media.  Ideally, at the end of the fast, if they plan to return to social media, they will take a close look at what is appearing in their feeds and curate carefully.  After this summer's social media fast (as a youth leader, I joined in with them), I have been making attempts to whittle down my feeds and try to make it such that when I do go on social media I am spending time only on the things that are actually important to me.

[carbon dioxide]

On 10/8/2018 at 12:20 PM, ALarson said:

I was just talking to my son about conference and he told me his wife and a large group of women in their ward are refusing to participate in the 10-day fast and feel it's horrible that only the women were asked to do this.  I was pretty shocked to hear this because my daughter-in-law is in the YW's presidency and is very active in the ward.  My son told me that there are other groups of women choosing not to do the fast in his area as well (according to his wife).  And....they are posting more than their usual instagram posts and facebook posts, etc., starting today in protest.

I honestly can see why women may wonder why the men weren't asked to give up social media for 10 days too, but I did not realize some would feel so strongly about it!  Now, these are all younger marrieds (the age of my daughter-in-law) as far as I know who are very active in the church.

Do you feel they are within their rights to do this?  It's a touchy topic, I know....

I think people are making mountains out of mole hills.  First, it was not a command for anyone to take a 10 day break.  It was simply encouragement for people to take a break from the social media addiction they are in.  Second, nowhere did Pres Nelson say that only women should do the fast and men could do whatever they want.  What applies to the women usually applies to the men.  If Pres Nelson tells the women to attend the temple more, is he saying that the men don't need to attend the temple more?  I don't think so.  Seems like people are always looking out for opportunities to be offended or complain about something. 

[rockpond]

8 minutes ago, Rain said:

I'm sure there are probably some or maybe even many that didn't think about it, just as there are probably some or maybe even many that were complaining about it before thinking it through. 

What I'm finding though is that those who jumped without thinking and being prayerful are often those that may most benefit from a break. The same goes for those that are not doing it out of protest.

Most of those I know have been thoughtful about it. A mother of a marching band student is waiting till the season is over. The social media person for a charity will continue posting for the charity, but will let go of it in other places. Duncan will do it on nonconsecutive days in the year 2027. 

Some may only check ward facebook pages. Some will read only positive blogs.

Right now I use GroupMe to connect with my family across the US and to arrange things in the organization I am in. Totally different purposes than some may use them for so they may drop the app for 10 days.

Really though, I think if it is a real problem to be off social media then faithful women will be considering what they should be doing and if it isn't then they really don't need to worry. 

All good points.  And I like the "intentionality" of the fast as you describe above.  I think that's what I was trying to get at.  This summer's social media fast didn't convince me to delete apps from my phone (as some friends did) but it did remind me to curate more carefully and be more careful about what gets to use my time.

[Tacenda]

7 hours ago, Rain said:

Maybe instead of worrying about what church leaders are suggesting, taking it to God and see what he has to say about it for you?

I'm not worrying about what they said, but internally kind of figured out long ago, that I need to quit so much social media. I don't blame the leaders for this, I'm just wondering their reasoning. I will have to check out the talk again and listen.

[ttribe]

4 hours ago, mnn727 said:

More feelings -- I'm get sick of everyones "feelings" especially those who not involved in the actual problem. People are getting addicted to being outraged about things that have little or no bearing on them or in this case over a Prophets SUGGESTION. 
God forbid that they take time to consider why they are so outraged by it.

 

and yes, this is as much about general society in the U.S. today as about this thread.

[sunstoned]

10 hours ago, mnn727 said:

Thou shall have no other Gods before me -  not even social media gods

People die on our highways every day.  How about a ten day driving fast?

[OnceWasMormon]

I left the Church long around 1981, after being a member from the age of four. It just wasn't for me.

Despite my non-member status, the one constant in my life to date was a fundamental belief that 'the Church' had been established by The Father and The Son. I imagine this is because I was naturally affected by my exposure to so much instruction over a period of twenty or so years.

I have never spoken against the Church out of respect for it.

Despite being divorced from it, I have nevertheless remain acquainted with it due to conversations with various members who are either family or former friends.

From the viewpoint of a familiar outsider, I have become lately dismayed by both the casual and determined resistance exhibited by the active membership, in response to prominent 'issues' of recent times, which is at odds with what I had always considered to be cornerstones of belief.

I have become aware of those who proclaim themselves as 'liberal mormons'. I have also become aware of those who appear not to 'trust in the Lord' and who instead opt to 'lean on (their) OWN understanding'.

My point is this. If one truly believes that the Church is headed by a living prophet, who receives revelation directly from God, why do so many among the membership appear to oppose prophetic revelation and go there own way?

Moreover, at WHAT point, exactly, was the notion that 'revelation' was up for question due to debated 'misinterpretation' of the direct-current revelation which a prophet of God has received?

Such a notion was NEVER part of the Church experience when I was a member.

Now, it seems, and the moratorium on social-media is a perfectly illustrative of this, the individual member can now set aside revelatory instruction whenever such instruction is personally inconvenient.

A servant cannot serve two masters. You are either with the Church or against it. The foregoing sentences were drummed into me in Primary, Priesthood, Seminary, and every other form of meeting I attended.

In the sincere view of THIS former member of the Church, it seems clear that many among today's membership exhibit the characteristics of those who have dwindled in disbelief, or who 'draw near to (God) with their lips but whose hearts are far from (HIM).

In summary, I declare to all that I am extremely disappointed that so many members of 'the one true Church on the earth today' are devoid of the level of faith in their own leadership which I once personally observed.

[rockpond]

In answering your question @OnceWasMormon I first want to clarify that I am not opposed to the social media fast (I posted earlier in this thread), the church name re-emphasis, or the 2-hour church change. 

One can, however, believe in a living prophet without believing that every word he speaks is revelation.  

[Thinking]

Somebody needs to inform Facebook, Instagram, and Twitter that millions of Mormon women will soon be coming off of a ten day social media fast, so they better make sure they have enough memory to handle the deluge of posts.

[Jeanne]

9 hours ago, OnceWasMormon said:

I left the Church long around 1981, after being a member from the age of four. It just wasn't for me.

Despite my non-member status, the one constant in my life to date was a fundamental belief that 'the Church' had been established by The Father and The Son. I imagine this is because I was naturally affected by my exposure to so much instruction over a period of twenty or so years.

I have never spoken against the Church out of respect for it.

Despite being divorced from it, I have nevertheless remain acquainted with it due to conversations with various members who are either family or former friends.

From the viewpoint of a familiar outsider, I have become lately dismayed by both the casual and determined resistance exhibited by the active membership, in response to prominent 'issues' of recent times, which is at odds with what I had always considered to be cornerstones of belief.

I have become aware of those who proclaim themselves as 'liberal mormons'. I have also become aware of those who appear not to 'trust in the Lord' and who instead opt to 'lean on (their) OWN understanding'.

My point is this. If one truly believes that the Church is headed by a living prophet, who receives revelation directly from God, why do so many among the membership appear to oppose prophetic revelation and go there own way?

Moreover, at WHAT point, exactly, was the notion that 'revelation' was up for question due to debated 'misinterpretation' of the direct-current revelation which a prophet of God has received?

Such a notion was NEVER part of the Church experience when I was a member.

Now, it seems, and the moratorium on social-media is a perfectly illustrative of this, the individual member can now set aside revelatory instruction whenever such instruction is personally inconvenient.

A servant cannot serve two masters. You are either with the Church or against it. The foregoing sentences were drummed into me in Primary, Priesthood, Seminary, and every other form of meeting I attended.

In the sincere view of THIS former member of the Church, it seems clear that many among today's membership exhibit the characteristics of those who have dwindled in disbelief, or who 'draw near to (God) with their lips but whose hearts are far from (HIM).

In summary, I declare to all that I am extremely disappointed that so many members of 'the one true Church on the earth today' are devoid of the level of faith in their own leadership which I once personally observed.

As an ex member, myself, I am very interested in your post here.  I understand very much where you are coming from, and yet, I admire those devout members who have had questions about revelations and seek those revelations for themselves.  Welcome to the board.  I resigned 10 years ago after 40 years of membership.

[Avatar4321]

On 10/14/2018 at 1:20 AM, OnceWasMormon said:

I left the Church long around 1981, after being a member from the age of four. It just wasn't for me.

Despite my non-member status, the one constant in my life to date was a fundamental belief that 'the Church' had been established by The Father and The Son. I imagine this is because I was naturally affected by my exposure to so much instruction over a period of twenty or so years.

I have never spoken against the Church out of respect for it.

Despite being divorced from it, I have nevertheless remain acquainted with it due to conversations with various members who are either family or former friends.

From the viewpoint of a familiar outsider, I have become lately dismayed by both the casual and determined resistance exhibited by the active membership, in response to prominent 'issues' of recent times, which is at odds with what I had always considered to be cornerstones of belief.

I have become aware of those who proclaim themselves as 'liberal mormons'. I have also become aware of those who appear not to 'trust in the Lord' and who instead opt to 'lean on (their) OWN understanding'.

My point is this. If one truly believes that the Church is headed by a living prophet, who receives revelation directly from God, why do so many among the membership appear to oppose prophetic revelation and go there own way?

Moreover, at WHAT point, exactly, was the notion that 'revelation' was up for question due to debated 'misinterpretation' of the direct-current revelation which a prophet of God has received?

Such a notion was NEVER part of the Church experience when I was a member.

Now, it seems, and the moratorium on social-media is a perfectly illustrative of this, the individual member can now set aside revelatory instruction whenever such instruction is personally inconvenient.

A servant cannot serve two masters. You are either with the Church or against it. The foregoing sentences were drummed into me in Primary, Priesthood, Seminary, and every other form of meeting I attended.

In the sincere view of THIS former member of the Church, it seems clear that many among today's membership exhibit the characteristics of those who have dwindled in disbelief, or who 'draw near to (God) with their lips but whose hearts are far from (HIM).

In summary, I declare to all that I am extremely disappointed that so many members of 'the one true Church on the earth today' are devoid of the level of faith in their own leadership which I once personally observed.

Perhaps it would be a good time to come back and show us how it's done

Edited October 16, 2018 by Avatar4321

[OnceWasMormon]

On 10/15/2018 at 3:16 AM, Avatar4321 said:

Perhaps it would be a good time to come back and show is how it's done

Now, now. Don't be defensive.

For the record, I DID go back, for several weeks, a few years ago.

I had become 'troubled' in relation to 'after death' matters. My sleeping pattern was disturbed and I was doubting my convictions regarding my decisions to leave the Church.

I felt a strong motivation to, for want of a better cliche, investigate the Church as an adult.

I was open-minded and I fully expected that, on stepping into the familiar environment, I would feel that I was 'home'. I went along in the belief that I would have a personal revelation.

The 'revelation' that I actually received took me completely by surprise.

I observed that the Church was 'the world' in microcosm, a social habitat which was dominated by a 'class structure', characterised by people with 'the right name' being elevated to high position; where affluence appeared to get one 'up the ladder' as if faith increased with wordly success.

I observed that the meek among the membership were still generally shunned by the more prosperous 'ruling' clique.

Still there were those who loved the sound of their own voice, preaching the love of the Saviour, while regarding those they felt their inferiors to be pariahs among them.

Every foible of 'Man', the pride, the vanity, the false modesty, the pursuit of wealth and of position, the snubbing of those less eloquent, less 'financially blessed', less educated, ALL I observed in this small community.

My personal revelation was that NOTHING had changed; that the people who administered the Church were no better than their counterparts in the Corporate world.

MY personal revelation was that the Church held nothing for me that I didn't already have outside of it.

Satan in my heart? My wife, children, and friends would disagree.

After that period of attendance, my soul has never since been troubled by those questions which had previously caused so much anxiety.

This is my experience.

 

[OnceWasMormon]

On 10/14/2018 at 9:23 PM, rockpond said:

In answering your question @OnceWasMormon I first want to clarify that I am not opposed to the social media fast (I posted earlier in this thread), the church name re-emphasis, or the 2-hour church change. 

One can, however, believe in a living prophet without believing that every word he speaks is revelation.  

There's the rub.

I was raised to believe that every instruction from a Prophet WAS revelation.

WHAT I was taught is not up for debate because such was indeed ingrained within my soul insofar as my understanding of what the Church AND the Prophet IS.

This is not my own understanding or interpretation. These fundamentals were made VERY clear to me by a host of different teachers over a period of nearly THIRTY years.

If instructions or policies do NOT constitute revelation, then they can only be a consequence of the flawed reasoning of Men.

I mean no offence to you; but please understand that one cannot simply jettison what one was taught to believe.

[Avatar4321]

8 minutes ago, OnceWasMormon said:

There's the rub.

I was raised to believe that every instruction from a Prophet WAS revelation.

WHAT I was taught is not up for debate because such was indeed ingrained within my soul insofar as my understanding of what the Church AND the Prophet IS.

This is not my own understanding or interpretation. These fundamentals were made VERY clear to me by a host of different teachers over a period of nearly THIRTY years.

If instructions or policies do NOT constitute revelation, then they can only be a consequence of the flawed reasoning of Men.

I mean no offence to you; but please understand that one cannot simply jettison what one was taught to believe.

 I’m not asking you to Jenison anything. Quite the opposite. I’m asking you return to the doctrine of  Christ. 

I know from My own personal revelation that President Nelson has been receiving revelation for the Church. I know this is Christ’s Church by the Holy Ghost

[rockpond]

14 minutes ago, OnceWasMormon said:

There's the rub.

I was raised to believe that every instruction from a Prophet WAS revelation.

WHAT I was taught is not up for debate because such was indeed ingrained within my soul insofar as my understanding of what the Church AND the Prophet IS.

This is not my own understanding or interpretation. These fundamentals were made VERY clear to me by a host of different teachers over a period of nearly THIRTY years.

If instructions or policies do NOT constitute revelation, then they can only be a consequence of the flawed reasoning of Men.

I mean no offence to you; but please understand that one cannot simply jettison what one was taught to believe.

I completely agree.  I was taught similarly.  When I learned that the prophet and apostles can be wrong...  When I discovered that they had led the church astray... it was a devastating blow to my faith.  I had to comportent reconstruct my testimony as a lifelong member in his late 30’s. 

I nearly left the church.  I don’t judge those who do feel the need to leave. 

[Avatar4321]

4 minutes ago, rockpond said:

I completely agree.  I was taught similarly.  When I learned that the prophet and apostles can be wrong...  When I discovered that they had led the church astray... it was a devastating blow to my faith.  I had to comportent reconstruct my testimony as a lifelong member in his late 30’s. 

I nearly left the church.  I don’t judge those who do feel the need to leave. 

I don’t really understand this to be honest. The D&C is full of the Lord rebuking His servants when they are wrong. And we are clearly taught that only Christ was ever perfect. So why the shock that the presiding authorities are human and make mistakes from time to time?

[MiserereNobis]

4 hours ago, Avatar4321 said:

So why the shock that the presiding authorities are human and make mistakes from time to time?

When was the last time the prophet made a mistake?

[The Nehor]

1 hour ago, MiserereNobis said:

When was the last time the prophet made a mistake?

Balaam beating his own ***.

Edit: Stupid filter is trying to edit the Bible!

Edited October 16, 2018 by The Nehor

[rockpond]

6 hours ago, Avatar4321 said:

I don’t really understand this to be honest. The D&C is full of the Lord rebuking His servants when they are wrong. And we are clearly taught that only Christ was ever perfect. So why the shock that the presiding authorities are human and make mistakes from time to time?

I was raised being taught that the prophet cannot lead the church astray.  So, it came as a shock to my testimony when I learned that they had and were.

 

[ALarson]

2 minutes ago, rockpond said:

I was raised being taught that the prophet cannot lead the church astray.  So, it came as a shock to my testimony when I learned that they had and were.

 

This was my experience as well.  It really shook me when I began seriously studying church history and some past doctrines.  I'm glad many now realize that the Prophets are not infallible and also how important it is to pray about things and receive your own spiritual confirmation.

Edited October 16, 2018 by ALarson