President Nelson's Devotional: "The Love and Laws of God"

[Calm]

You are misreading the section on suicide contagion risk, imo.  It is discussed as a contributor to increasing risk, not the sole contributor.

"increases risk" does not equal "cause"

Quote

Suicide contagion is most likely to occur among persons who are already seriously depressed or contemplating suicide. 

You already have two risk factors/multiple causes here...depression/suicide ideation coupled with incidents of suicide contagion.  Nor does this exclude other factors being necessary, it just identifies another risk factor suicide contagion is associated with.

Quote

Suggesting that suicide is a natural response to bullying can lead media to emphasize details that could increase contagion risk 

In this type of suicide contagion, one has to have bullying present (and thus it is also a risk factor).

Other comments specify "contagion risk".

Edited September 18, 2019 by Calm

[stemelbow]

31 minutes ago, JLHPROF said:

This statement clearly needs clarifying.  There are demonstrably false teachings from prophets.

If so, perhaps the whole speech needs it?  

[JAHS]

41 minutes ago, stemelbow said:

Here's what he said:  "We may not always tell people what they want to hear. Prophets are rarely popular. But we will always teach the truth!"

That does not say "truths that prophets always teach as being the divine laws of God" per se.  It suggests whenever a prophets teaches something it is true.  It excludes the possibility that a prophet could teach something that is not true.  

It seemed to be the whole point of his speech to these youngsters.  He wanted to address for them the contradiction that arose from the policy being implemented by revelation, then afterward it needing heavy revision.  Then a short time later it was rescinded, via none other than revelation.  It brings in the question of does God know what he's doing?  Or do men who are fallible in our estimation, mistake their impressions as if they are always coming from God.  Nelson ends up explaining, it seems to me, that the problem, fi anyone perceives it as such, is all God's doing.  

He talked about what truth is earlier in the talk which included the divine laws of God. When you are establishing a policy you are not really "teaching", you are just making policy which can change according to the needs and agency of the members. Some clarification would have been helpful on what he said but I make a distinction between teaching doctrine and making policy. 

[stemelbow]

14 minutes ago, Calm said:

You are misreading the section on suicide contagion risk, imo.  It is discussed as a contributor to increasing risk, not the sole contributor.

I"m not saying it is saying it is the sole contributor.  As I said, no one is saying there is but one contributor.  

14 minutes ago, Calm said:

"increases risk" does not equal "cause"

I didn't say it did.  

14 minutes ago, Calm said:

You already have two risk factors/multiple causes here...depression/suicide ideation coupled with incidents of suicide contagion.  Nor does this exclude other factors being necessary, it just identifies another risk factor suicide contagion is associated with.

Again.  that's why it's so funny and contradictory.  No one has said, for instance, suicide is a natural result of bullying, but for some reason they feel the need to argue against that.

[rockpond]

I'm curious why the prophet and apostles knew that the 2015 policy implementation would cause heartache, confusion, and weeping but they chose to implement it anyway and then pray for a change?

[stemelbow]

30 minutes ago, JAHS said:

He talked about what truth is earlier in the talk which included the divine laws of God. When you are establishing a policy you are not really "teaching", you are just making policy which can change according to the needs and agency of the members. Some clarification would have been helpful on what he said but I make a distinction between teaching doctrine and making policy. 

Ok.  Not sure how that addresses the issue...but ok.  

[The Nehor]

10 minutes ago, rockpond said:

I'm curious why the prophet and apostles knew that the 2015 policy implementation would cause heartache, confusion, and weeping but they chose to implement it anyway and then pray for a change?

Something causing pain is not always a good enough reason not to do it.

[rockpond]

Just now, The Nehor said:

Something causing pain is not always a good enough reason not to do it.

Agreed.  But why do it if you are just going to turn around and pray to change what you just did?

[The Nehor]

2 minutes ago, rockpond said:

Agreed.  But why do it if you are just going to turn around and pray to change what you just did?

I am not sure they did pray to change it. They prayed for further direction and got it and adjusted. I admit I am very interested to see whether the policy is completely rescinded or kept in place to some extent with the bishop making the judgement call instead of the First Presidency.

[Maestrophil]

1 minute ago, The Nehor said:

I am not sure they did pray to change it. They prayed for further direction and got it and adjusted. I admit I am very interested to see whether the policy is completely rescinded or kept in place to some extent with the bishop making the judgement call instead of the First Presidency.

I resonate with what Rchorse said in a previous post - that God doesn't phone it in, or send revelation like an email with a list of implementation, and warnings.  Oftentimes it is just a command to do something.  I have many personal examples of being told to do something that was, on its face, NOT at all what I thought was correct or in harmony with my feelings or beliefs of the moment... in a couple of those cases, after literally years of wondering why I made those unpopular choices, I was shown clearly that there was a reason that was to my benefit and/or the benefit of others - even though it caused years of pain and confusion - then end result exhibited the wisdom of someone who saw and knew more than me. 

 

 

[rockpond]

2 minutes ago, The Nehor said:

I am not sure they did pray to change it. They prayed for further direction and got it and adjusted. I admit I am very interested to see whether the policy is completely rescinded or kept in place to some extent with the bishop making the judgement call instead of the First Presidency.

So 15 Seers "considered countless permutations and combinations of possible scenarios that could arise" but somehow had to wait until after the policy had created heartache, confusion, and weeping to pray for a better scenario?

President Nelson's Jan-2016 statements about the policy are not making sense with his statements yesterday.

[rockpond]

3 minutes ago, Maestrophil said:

I resonate with what Rchorse said in a previous post - that God doesn't phone it in, or send revelation like an email with a list of implementation, and warnings.  Oftentimes it is just a command to do something.  I have many personal examples of being told to do something that was, on its face, NOT at all what I thought was correct or in harmony with my feelings or beliefs of the moment... in a couple of those cases, after literally years of wondering why I made those unpopular choices, I was shown clearly that there was a reason that was to my benefit and/or the benefit of others - even though it caused years of pain and confusion - then end result exhibited the wisdom of someone who saw and knew more than me. 

Except that in this case, President Nelson told us that after considering countless options, President Monson declared this policy reflected the "mind of the Lord and the will of the Lord".  That doesn't sound like it was simply a "command to do something".

[The Nehor]

5 minutes ago, rockpond said:

So 15 Seers "considered countless permutations and combinations of possible scenarios that could arise" but somehow had to wait until after the policy had created heartache, confusion, and weeping to pray for a better scenario?

President Nelson's Jan-2016 statements about the policy are not making sense with his statements yesterday.

Are you under the impression that prayers are always answered completely immediately?

3 minutes ago, rockpond said:

Except that in this case, President Nelson told us that after considering countless options, President Monson declared this policy reflected the "mind of the Lord and the will of the Lord".  That doesn't sound like it was simply a "command to do something".

What is the distinction? The mind and will of the Lord can be simply a command to do something.

Edited September 18, 2019 by The Nehor

[rockpond]

Just now, The Nehor said:

Are you under the impression that prayers are always answered completely immediately?

No.  But President Nelson in January of 2016 described a situation where there prayers were answered and they were told that the policy reflected the mind and the will of the Lord.

Further, since they knew that the policy would cause heartache, confusion, and weeping, why wouldn't they have waited if their prayers hadn't been answered completely?  And why would President Monson have declared that the mind and will of the Lord had been reached?

Just now, The Nehor said:

What is the distinction? The mind and will of the Lord can be simply a command to do something.

So your explanation of President Nelson's teachings on this is that President Monson was simply saying that the policy reflected the Lord's command to "do something"?  And so they implemented it knowing that they would pray to adjust it?

 

I'll ask my question again because I would like to know your answer:

Why would 15 Seers "countless permutations and combinations of possible scenarios that could arise" but somehow have to wait until after the policy had created heartache, confusion, and weeping to pray for a better scenario?

[stemelbow]

19 minutes ago, rockpond said:

No.  But President Nelson in January of 2016 described a situation where there prayers were answered and they were told that the policy reflected the mind and the will of the Lord.

Further, since they knew that the policy would cause heartache, confusion, and weeping, why wouldn't they have waited if their prayers hadn't been answered completely?  And why would President Monson have declared that the mind and will of the Lord had been reached?

So your explanation of President Nelson's teachings on this is that President Monson was simply saying that the policy reflected the Lord's command to "do something"?  And so they implemented it knowing that they would pray to adjust it?

 

I'll ask my question again because I would like to know your answer:

Why would 15 Seers "countless permutations and combinations of possible scenarios that could arise" but somehow have to wait until after the policy had created heartache, confusion, and weeping to pray for a better scenario?

Apparently they thought that without the policy families would be tormented.  Kids would be confused because they'd be baptized and would see parents who were gay.  Apparently at 9 years old the kids would be finding teachings at church that would be at odds with their gay parents.  Or something.  These 15 cared so much for these families, that they prayed and prayed...considered all sorts of scenarios, and voila, God inspired Monson to put out a poorly constructed policy that needed complete revising just afterward.  And then, the brethren who had considered the ramifications so much realized the policy change was actually hurting people moreso than baptizing 8 years would have.  

I mean wow...what a mess.  I'm not sure how this sits so nicely for so many.  

[JAHS]

15 minutes ago, rockpond said:

Why would 15 Seers "countless permutations and combinations of possible scenarios that could arise" but somehow have to wait until after the policy had created heartache, confusion, and weeping to pray for a better scenario?

Prophets can't see everything that is going to happen in the future. If they could they could be very rich playing the stock market. 🙂
They knew some people would probably not like the policy but at the time were unaware of how many would be affected by it or the degree of impact it would have.
After being made aware of it affecting many more people at a higher severity than they  thought it would at first,  they did something about it.

The people of Ninevah were able to change God's mind when Jonah prophesied that they would be destroyed. (Jonah 3) 

 

[rockpond]

3 minutes ago, stemelbow said:

I mean wow...what a mess.  I'm not sure how this sits so nicely for so many.  

I'm not sure why he would use it as an example of his "5 truths":

• All are sons and daughters of God.
• God loves all with perfect love.
• Some truths are divine and incontrovertible.
• Jesus Christ appoints prophets and apostles.
• The Holy Ghost confirms divine truths.

Doesn't seem to be a good example of any of them.

[stemelbow]

Just now, rockpond said:

I'm not sure why he would use it as an example of his "5 truths":

• All are sons and daughters of God.
• God loves all with perfect love.
• Some truths are divine and incontrovertible.
• Jesus Christ appoints prophets and apostles.
• The Holy Ghost confirms divine truths.

Doesn't seem to be a good example of any of them.

Good point.  It was a terrible example to use.  But I think he needed to address it with the younger crowd, I guess.  To me the use of his example could possibly cause more questions and concerns amongst those who listened, not less.  

[rockpond]

3 minutes ago, JAHS said:

Prophets can't see everything that is going to happen in the future. If they could they could be very rich playing the stock market. 🙂
They knew some people would probably not like the policy but at the time were unaware of how many would be affected by it or the degree of impact it would have.

Interesting conclusion.  I'm not a prophet but I knew this policy was horrible and would cause problems for the church the moment I first read it.

3 minutes ago, JAHS said:

After being made aware of it affecting many more people at a higher severity than they  thought it would at first,  they did something about it.

So is the conclusion then that in 2015, the prophet and apostles were mistaken about what the true mind and will of the Lord was?  Or causing heartache, confusion, and weeping was the mind and will of the Lord?

I think the former is an acceptable conclusion (for me).  I just wish they would admit it.

3 minutes ago, JAHS said:

The people of Ninevah were able to change God's mind when Jonah prophesied that they would be destroyed. (Jonah 3) 

This is an intriguing comparison.  So, was Jonah's "overthrown in 40 days" prophecy what the Lord told him to preach to the people of Ninevah?  Or was that Jonah coming up with that?

If it was the Lord telling Jonah to preach their destruction in 40 days, then was it the Lord's plan to get them to repent?  If we apply that to this policy, what's the lesson for us?  The Lord wanted to cause heartache, confusion and weeping?  Can you find a better lesson?

[rockpond]

7 minutes ago, stemelbow said:

Good point.  It was a terrible example to use.  But I think he needed to address it with the younger crowd, I guess.  To me the use of his example could possibly cause more questions and concerns amongst those who listened, not less.  

Yeah, I agree that he needed (and still needs) to address it.  And he's given a good rationale to those who want to believe that both the 2015 and (hopefully) forthcoming 2019 policies are inspired or revealed.  Rather than examining the contradictory statements from Pres. Nelson (2016 vs 2019), they can fall back on the idea that it was all done out of love for the children!

[smac97]

36 minutes ago, rockpond said:

No.  But President Nelson in January of 2016 described a situation where there prayers were answered and they were told that the policy reflected the mind and the will of the Lord.

That's not quite what he said.  See here:

Quote

We sustain 15 men who are ordained as prophets, seers, and revelators. When a thorny problem arises—and they seem only to get thornier each day—these 15 men wrestle with the issue, trying to see all the ramifications of various courses of action, and they diligently seek to hear the voice of the Lord. After I fast, pray, study, ponder, and counsel with my Brethren about weighty matters, it is not unusual for me to be awakened during the night with further impressions about issues with which we are concerned. And my Brethren have the same experience.

The First Presidency and Quorum of the Twelve Apostles counsel together and share all the Lord has directed us to understand and to feel individually and collectively. And then we watch the Lord move upon the President of the Church to proclaim the Lord’s will.

This prophetic process was followed in 2012 with the change in minimum age for missionaries and again with the recent additions to the Church’s handbook, consequent to the legalization of same-sex marriage in some countries. Filled with compassion for all, and especially for the children, we wrestled at length to understand the Lord’s will in this matter.

Ever mindful of God’s plan of salvation and of His hope for eternal life for each of His children, we considered countless permutations and combinations of possible scenarios that could arise. We met repeatedly in the temple in fasting and prayer and sought further direction and inspiration. And then, when the Lord inspired His prophet, President Thomas S. Monson, to declare the mind and will of the Lord, each of us during that sacred moment felt a spiritual confirmation. It was our privilege as Apostles to sustain what had been revealed to President Monson. Revelation from the Lord to His servants is a sacred process, and so is your privilege of receiving personal revelation.

Thanks,

-Smac

[smac97]

8 minutes ago, rockpond said:

Yeah, I agree that he needed (and still needs) to address it.  And he's given a good rationale to those who want to believe that both the 2015 and (hopefully) forthcoming 2019 policies are inspired or revealed.  Rather than examining the contradictory statements from Pres. Nelson (2016 vs 2019), they can fall back on the idea that it was all done out of love for the children!

Not seeing "contradictory statements."

Thanks,

-Smac

[The Nehor]

54 minutes ago, rockpond said:

No.  But President Nelson in January of 2016 described a situation where there prayers were answered and they were told that the policy reflected the mind and the will of the Lord.

Further, since they knew that the policy would cause heartache, confusion, and weeping, why wouldn't they have waited if their prayers hadn't been answered completely?  And why would President Monson have declared that the mind and will of the Lord had been reached?

So your explanation of President Nelson's teachings on this is that President Monson was simply saying that the policy reflected the Lord's command to "do something"?  And so they implemented it knowing that they would pray to adjust it?

 

I'll ask my question again because I would like to know your answer:

Why would 15 Seers "countless permutations and combinations of possible scenarios that could arise" but somehow have to wait until after the policy had created heartache, confusion, and weeping to pray for a better scenario?

No, knowing they might later adjust it. Not knowing they would later adjust it.

I suspect the time the policy was in effect may have had some positive effects but that is something I will have to wait for omniscience to find out. As to heartache, confusion, and weeping that is par for living in this world. While I accept the policy caused some pain for some I find it hard to see it as the catastrophe of tears some have portrayed it as.

[rockpond]

32 minutes ago, smac97 said:

That's not quite what he said.  See here:

Thanks,

-Smac

Not sure what you are saying.  Receiving the mind and will of the Lord is NOT having your prayers answered?  What would they have been praying for?

[JAHS]

26 minutes ago, rockpond said:

Interesting conclusion.  I'm not a prophet but I knew this policy was horrible and would cause problems for the church the moment I first read it.

Sounds like you are a prophet. I didn't know it would cause issues to the degree that it did. My thoughts were what parent would even allow their child to be a members of a church that would not let them be members and also call them apostate? 

28 minutes ago, rockpond said:

So is the conclusion then that in 2015, the prophet and apostles were mistaken about what the true mind and will of the Lord was?  Or causing heartache, confusion, and weeping was the mind and will of the Lord?

I think the former is an acceptable conclusion (for me).  I just wish they would admit it.

They were not mistaken what the true mind and will of the Lord was but, did not expect the great outpouring of criticism it would generate regarding how they applied the will of God to the policy. 
I didn't think they needed to change the policy at all because of how few people it would actually affect. And children could still have been baptized with First Presidency approval. 

33 minutes ago, rockpond said:

This is an intriguing comparison.  So, was Jonah's "overthrown in 40 days" prophecy what the Lord told him to preach to the people of Ninevah?  Or was that Jonah coming up with that?

If it was the Lord telling Jonah to preach their destruction in 40 days, then was it the Lord's plan to get them to repent?  If we apply that to this policy, what's the lesson for us?  The Lord wanted to cause heartache, confusion and weeping?  Can you find a better lesson?

The people of Ninevah believed it was from God (Jonah 3:5) and I am sure Jonah did too. (Jonah 3:3)
God did not want to cause heartache, confusion and weeping, He just wanted to let people know how seriously wrong same sex marriage was and how it could negatively affect the children of such couples.  
It was the details of how the policy was constructed that caused the heartache, so the Church leaders made some adjustments to it.