Hype for April 2019 Conference

[The Nehor]

6 hours ago, The Nehor said:

Getting published.

Yes, I am. I would explain more about why I find that comparison valid but I am sadly very busy today and will try to put up a post about it tomorrow.

Okay, having trouble getting to sleep so let me take a stab at this. First, for background I have a degree in Literature (and I somehow got a job, a great miracle). I view a lot of that field (and a few other academic fields) in the same way I view biblical criticism and conspiracy theories in terms of what I am about to communicate. There are, of course, many reasons the fields are not comparable and I do not suggest that the student of New Testament geography is on par with a crazy guy on the street screaming about aliens. Now the literary grad student who spends years of their life studying 20 lines in a poem is probably as mentally ill as the street preacher screaming about aliens but I am getting off-track.

Now, for why I think these fields are comparable:

In all of them you have the mostly honest group in these three categories looking for the facts. Someone studying the world of Shakespeare to try to understand cultural references in the text, someone studying other texts from the First Century CE, and the guy studying the facts and background of the JFK assassination. No problem here. I have no problem with this group. They are looking at the data that might help understand the text a little and are humble about their conclusions and the predictive power of their studies.

Then you have those who start speculating based on those facts. Based on this poem of Shakespeare's he was clearly attracted to men, the author of Luke clearly believed X and read document Y as similar ideas were in the gospel itself and the writer also definitely wrote after Z date because that is the first record we have of that elsewhere. The JFK assassination was orchestrated by a large group of people working for X. Here is where I doubt almost everything. The speculative leaps do not impress me. We see people do this all the time with each other and this is comparable to what C.S. Lewis was talking about above where in his experience they are almost always wrong when they tried to explain the rationale for why he wrote and what influenced him. This is also where they start playing with the unprovable. When higher critics argue there are almost no tests that can be applied and the disagreements are of interpretation and not of fact. While I respect what these groups might know their knowledge does not give them superhuman erudition to determine what was added later, what was redacted, and what influenced the writer. Why should I assume we can pin down any awkwardness in a text as being due to something being added or removed? People write awkwardly. I have to assume Isaiah was written by multiple authors because part of it is written more poetically? By that logic Shakespeare could not have written both plays and poetry. There is just an arrogance about the whole thing that makes me deeply suspicious.

And for completeness there are those in the field who have gone completely off the reservation such as arguing that Shakespeare was a woman, Jesus was taught by ancient alien visitors and worked miracles through their advanced technology, and JFK was killed by a group of Roswell greys to put him out of action as he was a reptilian puppet and this would shift the balance in their war for dominion over the Earth. Almost everyone agrees these guys are nuts.

 

One obvious counterargument is that some fields have more knowledge then others. That the biblical critics and literary scholars have enough data to make these claims. But does knowledge give them that ability? I would argue no. I know a lot of ink has been spilled over this stuff and a lot of time put into it but that does not make it accurate and I suspect the reason it survives is that it is simply not testable. It is arguable and conclusions come and go but that is more about how convincingly it was argued and not because anyone proved anything.

I still would like to see a real test case constructed and passed on to the academics that are supposedly very good at this to see how accurate they are when given a testable case but it will probably never happen because of the time and effort it would require and I suspect the academics would be too nervous at the prospect to submit to the test in any case.

[CMZ]

keep in mind that not all Church announcements are made at General Conference (I still realize that the OP here specifically mentions April 2019 conference). I will say that Elder Bennett spoke in our stake conference in January of this year and on Sunday morning probably spoke as the First Presidency was being reorganized in Salt Lake, and he testified that God's will was occurring and that we should pray to get our own individual witness of the divinity of President Nelson's calling.

[CMZ]

On 12/11/2018 at 6:00 AM, rockpond said:

I called it secular because @JLHPROF said:

“Pres. Nelson has a vision for how he thinks the Church should look and he realizes his age and the accompanying time limit.”

which to me sounds like this is all about President Nelson’s ideas and timeline, not the Lord’s. 

The Lord doesn't work with blank slates. He can work with prophets who have their own ideas.

[CMZ]

On 12/11/2018 at 6:17 AM, stemelbow said:

Of course we have nothing but past leaders telling us that God doesn't speak to them like that either.  So it just feels like fabricated efforts to excite.  

Quote

I testify to you that in the deliberations of the Council of the First Presidency and the Quorum of the Twelve Apostles in the temple, and after our beloved prophet petitioned the Lord for revelation to move forward with these adjustments, a powerful confirmation was received by all.

https://www.lds.org/general-conference/2018/10/deep-and-lasting-conversion-to-heavenly-father-and-the-lord-jesus-christ?lang=eng#p41

 

[CMZ]

On 12/11/2018 at 2:03 PM, Duncan said:

I heard they are revamping stake conferences, still two a year but when a Visitor comes there are no more Sat. Evening sessions (what they'll do then I have no idea, maybe see a movie?!) and a restyled sat. aft. training session

Odd, because Saturday evening adult sessions were generally when people could ask questions of the visiting general authority.

[CMZ]

On 12/11/2018 at 9:01 PM, rockpond said:

Sister Nelson's comments from October do lend support to @JLHPROF's comment.  I've had the quote in my signature for a while now because I found it interesting.  But I'll paste it in this post since signature's can change:

Sister Wendy Nelson in Oct 2018, speaking of the Prophet: "It is as though he's been unleashed... he's free to follow through with things he's been concerned about but could never do. Now that he's president of [the Church], he can do those things.”

Like @JLHPROF, Sister Nelson seems to imply that at least some of what has been happening in the church is the mind and will of President Nelson.  Not necessarily the mind and will of God.  One example might be the name of the Church.  It would seem that this has been a concern of his for quite some time but he couldn't make the strong statements he made last October until he became the president of the church.

The name of the Church was an important issue once it was revealed in 1835 (or thereabouts). The revelation now is to adhere to the former revelation.

[Duncan]

7 hours ago, CMZ said:

Odd, because Saturday evening adult sessions were generally when people could ask questions of the visiting general authority.

i'm awaiting more instruction, I heard it from my brother who heard it from yadda yadda yadda!

[CMZ]

On 12/13/2018 at 9:37 AM, clarkgoble said:

This would be tied to the second endowment. I'd add that if second anointings are necessary then there's the problem that as far as we know they aren't done vicariously. If they are, it's only by an inner circle and nowhere at the rates that would be necessary for all the dead awaiting resurrection. I think the presumption is such things will be done primarily in the millennium. But the point is that those are things yet to be restored. 

As I hinted there are pretty looming issues over ordinances related to sealings. For instance feminists often bring up polygamy. For most more orthodox members, even if they like to keep the issues away for obvious reasons, there's the issue of what to do with genealogy. Again the presumption is that this will all be resolved in the millennium. But to resolve it lots of revelation would be necessary. Will all polygamous marriages be ratified? What of remarriages in this life? (Both male and female) There's lots of unanswered questions.

 

It sounds cliched, I know, but it'll all get worked out. I don't think there are announcements needed in General Conference about how everyone's plural marriage or monogamous marriage or whatever is going to work out in the eternities. Those are individual situations handled on a case-by-case basis. No need for a conference talk saying, "So, Sister B. got married civilly to Mister J. and had three kids with him before he passed away and then she got sealed to Brother Q. in the temple and had two kids with him, but she feels like her former husband will accept the gospel in the next life. Oh, and by the way, Brother Q. descends from the polygamous families in Mexico. So now we will reveal to the whole Church just how their family relationships will work out in the next life. When we're done with that then we're going to talk about someone else's situation. And then the next person's. And so on."

[CMZ]

On 12/12/2018 at 5:43 PM, Avatar4321 said:

Well then look at the fruit of the tree of life that Lord offers in His Church instead. 

Do as Jacob taught and feast upon the love of Christ 

Yes, the leaders are human and if we focus on their faults then that will be all we see. Each individual can live the gospel and reap the benefits of it even if whoever the "leaders" at any particular moment happen to be are not perfect.

[CMZ]

On 12/13/2018 at 2:33 PM, SouthernMo said:

But, why can’t you, me and our families gather together in my home to pray and call that a church?

Have you been catching the talk about a home-centered church? The Church exists as scaffolding for families.

[CMZ]

On 12/13/2018 at 6:54 AM, hope_for_things said:

Jesus didn't formally organize a church

He called twelve apostles and a group of Seventy and another group of Seventy. This was all part of organizing a church.

[CMZ]

On 12/13/2018 at 3:21 PM, why me said:

The two hour block is interesting. However, I think that it is a disaster for singles. No family to fall back to. Just alone studying the scriptures and learning alone. And less fellowship from the branch or ward. And then the change in home teaching made it even worse for singles. No monthly visits on offer. Just a hope for a possible phone call. I do hope that any changes that may come will not be so family centered.

Except that they can still mingle after church for another hour with each other if they so choose. And their ministering brothers and sisters are supposed to be meeting their needs, including if that means monthly visits. Nothing in this favors families over singles. And a lot of people weren't doing all their hometeaching before any ways. The new program is: do whatever your assignee needs (don't nail me to the wall if I missed some nuance here that you feel should be included; I am rushing off to one-hour church).

[Bernard Gui]

57 minutes ago, CMZ said:

He called twelve apostles and a group of Seventy and another group of Seventy. This was all part of organizing a church.

He certainly formed a church among the Lehites during his sojourn with them after his resurrection.....and even gave them instructions about what it should be called.

[CMZ]

On 12/13/2018 at 6:29 PM, sheilauk said:

I have suggested encouraging the singles to stay after church for a while to study together.

Remind those you are in contact with that Elder Cook said such meetings are encouraged.

[CMZ]

On 12/14/2018 at 9:32 AM, Thinking said:

I thought there was an unwritten rule that members weren't allowed to start speculating about April conference until after the new year.

That said. I wish Nelson would disavow Hinckley's opinion about the number of earrings a woman is allowed to wear.

If it's important to you then wear whatever number you want!

[JLHPROF]

11 hours ago, CMZ said:

The revelation now is to adhere to the former revelation.

🤔- Too bad they don't get a few more of those.

[CMZ]

On 12/16/2018 at 6:59 AM, Judd said:

I hope they announce the end of separating the men and women in endowment sessions, and allowing couples to sit together. That would be huge.

There's important symbolism involved in the temporary separation.

[CMZ]

On 12/16/2018 at 1:03 PM, Hamba Tuhan said:

Because women administer the ordinances to women; men, to men. This makes that logistically easier. Plus I suspect there is also important symbolism in being reunited at the end. 

Yes, important symbolism involved in entering the temple together, being separated, and then brought back together in the celestial room.

On 12/16/2018 at 8:52 PM, JLHPROF said:

And then there are the numerous prophecies of our early leaders and scripture that the Church would get very out of order then be put back in order by Christ.  But never fully apostatize.

 

Can you provide a couple such quotations?

[JLHPROF]

2 hours ago, CMZ said:

It sounds cliched, I know, but it'll all get worked out. I don't think there are announcements needed in General Conference about how everyone's plural marriage or monogamous marriage or whatever is going to work out in the eternities. Those are individual situations handled on a case-by-case basis. No need for a conference talk saying, "So, Sister B. got married civilly to Mister J. and had three kids with him before he passed away and then she got sealed to Brother Q. in the temple and had two kids with him, but she feels like her former husband will accept the gospel in the next life. Oh, and by the way, Brother Q. descends from the polygamous families in Mexico. So now we will reveal to the whole Church just how their family relationships will work out in the next life. When we're done with that then we're going to talk about someone else's situation. And then the next person's. And so on."

I completely agree.  Except I don't see why we started to doubt what IS revealed.  A skeptical approach to revelation isn't likely to generate new revelations in the future.

[CMZ]

38 minutes ago, JLHPROF said:

🤔- Too bad they don't get a few more of those.

Take your vitamins and get some rest!

[JLHPROF]

24 minutes ago, CMZ said:

Take your vitamins and get some rest!

Gladly.  If the Church resumes following the revelations to Joseph Smith that it had set aside I will be happy to be very tired.

[CMZ]

25 minutes ago, JLHPROF said:

Gladly.  If the Church resumes following the revelations to Joseph Smith that it had set aside I will be happy to be very tired.

Yay, polygamy!

[cdowis]

On 12/13/2018 at 6:30 PM, why me said:

Dan did wonderful work and he helped many stay in the church by his posts on the fairmormon site. 

May I suggest that he would have a wider influence by posting on youtube forums of the antiMormon videos.

[Rain]

13 hours ago, CMZ said:

Odd, because Saturday evening adult sessions were generally when people could ask questions of the visiting general authority.

I've heard about this,  but it has never happened in my stake when I or my husband has been there and we generally go.  The question thing has happened for him in leadership sessions though. 

[cdowis]

del

Edited December 23, 2018 by cdowis