General Conference

[Scott Lloyd]

1 minute ago, pogi said:

 

That is fantastic!  I was afraid by the way he described it, and by what I imagined, that it would look busy and disjointed (I was imagining a three dimensional stone).  This one is simple, clean, and beautiful.  Pretty powerful actually.

No “Mormon” here, and no “LDS Church.”  And he declared again this is not the Church of Joseph Smith or the Church of Mormon. 
 

Is President Nelson doubling down, or tripling or quadrupling or quintupling? Will the message ever sink in? 

[MiserereNobis]

Hey, friends, so you are fasting on Good Friday now? Great! You'll be joining all the Catholics worldwide!  We always fast on Good Friday, and I'm sure that this year many many Catholic intentions for the fast will be focused on the coronavirus, too.

A question about the new symbol. Does this mean Moroni is no longer to be used as a symbol (like the term Mormon)? Or is it just a new official symbol and Moroni is still ok.

[Raingirl]

1 minute ago, Scott Lloyd said:

 

 

 

 

The reports I’m reading now only talk about one fast, not two, so apparently I misunderstood. Sorry for the confusion. 

The way I remember it, the reference to ‘tonight’ was that he putting out the call tonight for a fast on Good Friday. 

[Scott Lloyd]

1 minute ago, Raingirl said:

The way I remember it, the reference to ‘tonight’ was that he putting out the call tonight for a fast on Good Friday. 

That makes sense. 

[Raingirl]

1 hour ago, Calm said:

What a weird sight to see Temple Square empty.

That really struck me, as well. I think that because I’m quarantining alone (and from before the official quarantine because of a TBI), I am more keenly aware of the absence of people. 

[Nofear]

12 minutes ago, Prof said:

That struck me as well. Last time I was there, buses were pulling up to the tabernacle to let tourists out. Not so today.

I was also struck by how green the grass was!

You could also tell it was recent since Moroni's trumpet was missing.

[Calm]

4 minutes ago, Nofear said:

You could also tell it was recent since Moroni's trumpet was missing.

For me it was looking out the window at the closing and it appearing to be live as same amount of light out there. It just struck me as so immediate in a way it usually doesn’t with crowds that this was Temple Square right now...and it is a ghost plaza. Bet the cameraman felt really weird.

Edited April 5, 2020 by Calm

[Scott Lloyd]

4 minutes ago, MiserereNobis said:

Hey, friends, so you are fasting on Good Friday now? Great! You'll be joining all the Catholics worldwide!  We always fast on Good Friday, and I'm sure that this year many many Catholic intentions for the fast will be focused on the coronavirus, too.

A question about the new symbol. Does this mean Moroni is no longer to be used as a symbol (like the term Mormon)? Or is it just a new official symbol and Moroni is still ok.

Angel Moroni statues as seen on most of the temples were always understood to be a symbol of the latter-day restoration, of what John prophesied in the Book of Revelation, when he said he “saw another angel fly in the midst of heaven” having the everlasting gospel to preach to all mankind. I’m guessing it will be retained for that purpose, but the new visual symbol announced tonight will henceforth represent the Savior’s Church, The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints. 
 

That said, I’m learning as time goes by not to get too dogmatic in predicting what President Nelson is going to announce next!

[Nofear]

All in all, I thought today's conference sessions were great. While I found myself observing all kinds of little and trivial things (though I missed the handshake, maybe I was finishing up my last MTGA game of the day), that's not to say there weren't significant observations too. I just held those pearls close.

[Nevo]

1 hour ago, carbon dioxide said:

I don't know Matthew but I was in the same dorm with his brother David Holland back in the day at BYU.   David was a very impressive guy even at that age.   I could have guess back in 1995 he would be a GA one day.  Sometimes it does run in the family.  Regardless better them than me.  I don't aspire or desire such positions.   I rather be the fly on the wall than at the front talking.

I've always been struck by the introduction that Elder Holland gave to David at a BYU symposium years ago: https://youtu.be/fiUgezXublQ?t=876 

I think it's entirely possible that Elder Holland has exceptional children. I would be happy to see more general authorities like Matthew and David Holland.

[Navidad]

3 hours ago, california boy said:

I wasn't going to comment on this issue because I personally couldn't care less, but it feels like others are dismissing your point as not being as prevalent as it actually is.  This might be interesting to you.  

Not sure when the quote was written. It looks like things are starting to change a little.  In recent years, the Church seems to be trying to reach out to others outside that tight group.  The person who wrote the article added this addendum.  There may be more like this since the addendum was added.  

 

 

3 hours ago, california boy said:

I wasn't going to comment on this issue because I personally couldn't care less, but it feels like others are dismissing your point as not being as prevalent as it actually is.  This might be interesting to you.  

Not sure when the quote was written. It looks like things are starting to change a little.  In recent years, the Church seems to be trying to reach out to others outside that tight group.  The person who wrote the article added this addendum.  There may be more like this since the addendum was added.  

 

Well Elder Bednar is my 13th cousin and I am not even a member. I guess that settles the nepotism thing!!! 

Edited April 5, 2020 by Navidad

[mfbukowski]

8 hours ago, rongo said:

You sound like me. I just went and counted --- I have 12 books on my nightstand right now (I toggle between them, rather than reading straight through. Non-fiction, fiction, reference, language primer [Norwegian], etc.) 

I don't know why I am here. I guess it's the social aspect. I really should be reading and writing

[strappinglad]

 A thought. Would it be out of order for President Nelson to reach out privately to our Jewish, Muslim , Buddhist, Roman Catholic, Greek Orthodox , etc. brothers and suggest we all join in a day /week of prayer and fasting? Maybe that would be a hair too ecumenical. I do remember when , at various times in the past , we( Mormons )would fast for rain, the Hutterites would join in.  It might be looked upon as presumptuous by our little upstart group I guess.

[Raingirl]

3 minutes ago, strappinglad said:

 A thought. Would it be out of order for President Nelson to reach out privately to our Jewish, Muslim , Buddhist, Roman Catholic, Greek Orthodox , etc. brothers and suggest we all join in a day /week of prayer and fasting? Maybe that would be a hair too ecumenical. I do remember when , at various times in the past , we( Mormons )would fast for rain, the Hutterites would join in.  It might be looked upon as presumptuous by our little upstart group I guess.

From his talk: “I invite all, including those not of our faith, to fast and pray on Good Friday ...”.

[Rain]

5 hours ago, strappinglad said:

 A thought. Would it be out of order for President Nelson to reach out privately to our Jewish, Muslim , Buddhist, Roman Catholic, Greek Orthodox , etc. brothers and suggest we all join in a day /week of prayer and fasting? Maybe that would be a hair too ecumenical. I do remember when , at various times in the past , we( Mormons )would fast for rain, the Hutterites would join in.  It might be looked upon as presumptuous by our little upstart group I guess.

When it was mentioned above that Catholics already fast that day I wondered if that was why the day was chosen.  It makes sense to do it on the same day instead of a different one.

Edited April 5, 2020 by Rain

[Bernard Gui]

6 hours ago, Scott Lloyd said:

Apparently so. 
 

It was announced several months ago that the evening session at this conference would be in commemoration of the First Vision and they would depart from

the custom of having it be a priesthood or a general women’s session. 
 

You really hadn’t heard that? 

Neither Sister Gui nor I. Shows how much we pay attention, I guess.

Edited April 5, 2020 by Bernard Gui

[Bernard Gui]

6 hours ago, Navidad said:

Ok Thank you my friend. I just wasn't sure to what you were referring. Of course trinitarians believe that the three persons of the Godhead can be in three different places at the same time; or can appear in different and separate forms at the same time. I don't see why a trinitarian would discount the first vision as portrayed in The Pearl of Great Price.

Honest question...if the Godhead appears in different forms is that not hiding their true nature and deceiving people?

Edited April 5, 2020 by Bernard Gui

[Bernard Gui]

4 hours ago, Nofear said:

Random observation, in the “I Am a Child of God” recording the conductor (sorry bad with names) buttoned both of his two button suit buttons. That is not quite consistent with social norms around suit coats.

https://missionary.lds.org/clothing/elder/dress/suits?lang=eng&_r=1

And the arrangement was really heavy on the organ bass pedals.

[Bernard Gui]

3 hours ago, Scott Lloyd said:

The talk that President Oaks is giving now, clarifying the doctrine of the priesthood as it pertains to men and women, tells me that there will be no changes by way of priesthood ordination of women. 

Sister Gui and I noted that what he said is pretty much what we have been taught since before we were married.

[Navidad]

4 hours ago, Robert F. Smith said:

Then you would be alone among normative Christians, who have been lambasting Mormons for generations now for their non-Trinitarian beliefs.  You have been spending far too much time among the Mormons, Phil.  You appear to have become infected by their heresy.  You may just as well seal the deal by making a baptismal date with your local LDS missionaries (if there are any still out there in the midst of the Pandemic). 

I have never met an Evangelical who didn't believe that the Godhead was present in three manifestations or three persons in Christ's baptism. Christ was being baptized in the flesh. The Holy Spirit descended in the form of a dove - a clear theophany, and the voice of the Father was heard from heaven by the crowd. I have also never met an Evangelical who didn't believe that God was one in essence and three in persons: Father, Son, and Holy Ghost. The Father sent the Son to earth. The Son then returned to the Father. The Spirit is distinct from both Father and Son, both of whom sent Him; yet one in essence. Co-eternal. co-equal, and co-existent since eternity.

There are also non-Trinitarian groups to be found among the Pentecostals as well as the members of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints who I believe are complete Christians. Also I know of no Evangelicals who believe one has to believe in the trinity at the point in time that one is saved. My guess is that a significant majority of those who become Christians from a non-Christian background could not explain the trinity and probably have never heard of it. Yet, they would be considered by Evangelicals to be completely a Christian via either conversion, repentance and statement of faith, or by those plus baptism (depending on the group). I believe I am stating normative Christian beliefs.

I like what Roger Olson says, reflecting a belief taught by theologian Emil Brunner - The trinity is a landmark, a pillar of Christian doctrine, but it is not essential to being a Christian. I have believed this ever since college when I would go out "tracting" with the Four Spiritual Laws. As missionaries we would "witness" to folks and hope to get them to the point of saying the sinner's prayer. After that, we believed they were saved - perhaps immature, yet completely Christian. I never once tracted someone by sharing with a witness to the trinity. I never went back to my dorm and said to the other tracters - well I helped convert someone to Christ today, but they didn't profess the trinity, so they weren't really saved.  Never happened! I have never known it to happen. And remember, I promised not to tell member of the LDS Church what they believe. Please don't try and convince me what Evangelicals believe. Fair enough?

Edited April 5, 2020 by Navidad

[Navidad]

59 minutes ago, Bernard Gui said:

Honest question...if the Godhead appears in different forms is that not hiding their true nature and deceiving people?

I don't understand your question? Don't you believe that Heavenly Father spoke at Christ's baptism, while the Spirit descended as a dove, and Christ in his human flesh was baptized physically by immersion? How is that not the Godhead present in different forms (a voice, a theophany as a dove, and a fully human being)? I don't understand the deceit part or implication.

[teddyaware]

22 minutes ago, Navidad said:

I don't understand your question? Don't you believe that Heavenly Father spoke at Christ's baptism, while the Spirit descended as a dove, and Christ in his human flesh was baptized physically by immersion? How is that not the Godhead present in different forms (a voice, a theophany as a dove, and a fully human being)? I don't understand the deceit part or implication.

At least insofar as the prophet Joseph Smith is concerned, you’re incorrect about the Holy Ghost taking the form of an actual dove...

“The sign of the dove was instituted before the creation of the world, a witness for the Holy Ghost, and the devil cannot come in the sign of a dove. The Holy Ghost is a personage [a man], and is in the form of a personage [a man]. It does not confine itself to the form of the dove, but in sign [symbol or representation] of the dove. The Holy Ghost cannot be transformed into a dove; but the sign of a dove was given to John to signify the truth of the deed, as the dove is an emblem or token of truth and innocence" (TPJS, p. 276). 

It appears that at the baptism of Christ the Holy Ghost generated a foreordained symbolic manifestation of some kind that testified he was present to bear witness to the Savior’s divine sonship. He did not transform himself into a bird.

[Robert F. Smith]

1 hour ago, Navidad said:

I have never met an Evangelical who didn't believe that the Godhead was present in three manifestations or three persons in Christ's baptism. Christ was being baptized in the flesh. The Holy Spirit descended in the form of a dove - a clear theophany, and the voice of the Father was heard from heaven by the crowd. I have also never met an Evangelical who didn't believe that God was one in essence and three in persons: Father, Son, and Holy Ghost. The Father sent the Son to earth. The Son then returned to the Father. The Spirit is distinct from both Father and Son, both of whom sent Him; yet one in essence. Co-eternal. co-equal, and co-existent since eternity...................................

You do a lot of hemming and hawwing, Phil.  Of course, you can try to make your tri-unity out to be some form of monotheism, but the Jews and Muslims will see right through it and consider you as merely a fast-talking tritheist.  The Mormons will just think that you are confused.  My main problem with your attempt to be all things to all men is that it just doesn’t comport with the Bible.

In 4th century A.D. Alexandria, Egypt, Bishop Athanasius was the prime mover in the development of the normative Christian doctrine of the Trinity as expressed in the Nicene Creed – which goes back to ancient Egyptian religion, in which Amon-Re-Ptah subsume all gods, all gods being three, and three being one.  According to modern scholars like Klaus Baer and Jan Assmann, not only was the Christian Trinity developed at Alexandria (Harry Wolfson agreed on the place, but maintained that the Christians got the idea more immediately from Philo Judaeus [Philo: Foundation of Religious Philosophy in Judaism , Christianity, and Islam]), but Ptah the Creator God/ Chaos (Memphis), is both male & female.  All the gods arose from him, are joined to him, and are him.  the Christian Trinity and the notion of hypostatic union was taken from ancient Egyptian religion.  However, Assmann argues for the expression of the Egyptian trinity or “triunity” at least as early as Middle Kingdom Egypt.[1]  There is nothing new in this assertion, and it is usually associated with one or more items from an entire constellation of common Christian and Egyptian religious terms.[2]  In addition, as the Muslims say, "God does not beget and is not begotten."

[1] Assmann, Search for God, 177-180,238-239.  Cf. S. Morenz, Egyptian Religion, 253-257,351; John Wilson in Frankfort, ed., Before Philosophy (Penguin/ Pelican, 1957), 75, and Thorkild Jacobsen in Before Philosophy, 142-148, both from H. Frankfort, et al., eds., The Intellectual Adventure of Ancient Man (Chicago, 1946); James P. Allen, Middle Egyptian, 44-45.

[2] Note the frequent adaptation of ancient Egyptian terminology to describe Christian concepts in John Gee, “Some Neglected Aspects of Egypt’s Conversion to Christianity,” in M. Ayad, ed., Coptic Culture: Past, Present and Future (Coptic Orthodox Church Centre, 2012), 48-54.

[mfbukowski]

2 hours ago, Navidad said:

I have also never met an Evangelical who didn't believe that God was one in essence and three in persons: Father, Son, and Holy Ghost.

That word "essence" or "substance " is the major problem- it comes from pagan Greek philosophy, Plato and Aristotle.  Then picked up by Philo, Thomas Aquinas etc. And like Bob says, Plato and Pythagoras got all that stuff from the Egyptians.

Transubstantiation and Alchemy all come from the same source as well.

It's undefinable, and therefore impossible to hang up meaning on.

We define the unifying principal as purpose, and love, as a human family is "one", or any group can be "one in purpose".  Heck,  any business is "one in purpose", any collective activity can be explained that way, even a baseball team. We know what that means.

That's another place where pragmatism fits well with our views.

It's based in teleology instead of undefinable metaphysics.

Edited April 5, 2020 by mfbukowski

[Scott Lloyd]

3 hours ago, Bernard Gui said:

Neither Sister Gui nor I. Shows how much we pay attention, I guess.

I’m wondering now how much they had to depart due to the pandemic from what was initially planned.