Jump to content

Church ends saturday evening sessions for general conference


Recommended Posts

On 6/7/2021 at 11:58 PM, Scott Lloyd said:

Not just any stupid donut. A Krispy Kreme!

image.jpeg.0ea1c3d72e5c22abdaed288fc1883c48.jpeg

 

But that’s OK. I’ve never grasped the appeal of coffee. 

Some people don’t like coffee, some people do. 23 million accounts on the Starbucks app so someone likes it. That’s ok , at least donuts are not against wow so obviously much healthier choice. 😂

Link to comment
4 hours ago, JLHPROF said:

My doctrinal belief - Priesthood is an eternal order with specific offices and callings, limitations and restrictions of office, potentially originating in premortality.
Ordination to offices like Deacon, Teacher, Priest, Elder, High Priest, Apostle aren't given to women not because God doesn't currently authorize it, but because they are literally not able to hold these offices.
God himself actually can't authorize it, any more than he could approve of adultery. 
Certain offices and callings are axiomatically male and certain ones are female, not discretionary.
There are priesthood offices women can and do hold.  But you can no more ordain a woman a Bishop than you can ordain a man a Queen and Priestess.  It simply doesn't work.

I believe in this in a way.  I also believe there are positions a woman can hold that have not been considered or created yet because humans can't fathom anything but a patriarchy.  Even many women, for that matter, cannot fathom it.  IMO.  no CFR to offer. 

Link to comment
Posted (edited)
1 hour ago, MustardSeed said:

I believe in this in a way.  I also believe there are positions a woman can hold that have not been considered or created yet because humans can't fathom anything but a patriarchy.  Even many women, for that matter, cannot fathom it.  IMO.  no CFR to offer. 

I believe that there are offices for women, but that they are limited to the higher temple order, not to the lower Church administrative order.

I believe that Queen, Priestess, Matriarch, and Eve are all offices, just like Heavenly Mother.  But I do not believe there are priesthood offices to be revealed for the Church for women.  In the same way I'd like to see Mother's blessings brought back.

It goes back to the various orders of Priesthood that Joseph taught on. He specified three.  In my opinion only the highest connected with eternity, the fullness of priesthood will feature female ordinations.  Those offices related to this fallen earth will not.

 

Edited by JLHPROF
Link to comment
10 hours ago, JustAnAustralian said:

That's pretty much how the ones here run, and even then it still manages to spread within the quarantine hotels.

My brother says in Singapore if they traveled, they would have to stay in the assigned hotel, stay put in the not particularly great room and would not even be able to open the windows. And it would cost them several thousand dollars to pay for it.  

Link to comment
Posted (edited)
7 hours ago, mgy401 said:

I have no doubt that the GAs work long and hard, and do an excellent work.  But 104 hours/week shakes out to a hair under fifteen hours per day, seven days a week.  Or seventeen and a half hours per day, if you give them an “off” day once a week.  
 

It’s not impossible, of course; but I find it highly unlikely—especially given the Church’s emphasis on family life and work-life balance.  With all due respect and admiration, my money would be on the “104 hours” figure being the result of a miscommunication. 

If you remove having to do maintenance and other home care assuming they have people taking care of that for them, count travel time which may include when they sleep (overnight plane trips or naps in the back seat) or doing work on the phone, have a lot of business meetings while eating, and count personal study time as part of it since they probably are thinking about talks during that time, if not writing them, I see it as possible...but I hope he was pushing the high end of a work week when they are having to travel and not typical. 

Edited by Calm
Link to comment
3 hours ago, secondclasscitizen said:

It would not be you imposing, that would be the church.

Why would it be the church?   You suggested fortnightly meetings.  How do you propose single members have the sacrament in the weeks not at church if not by asking / imposing on others?

Link to comment
Posted (edited)
5 hours ago, secondclasscitizen said:

Some people don’t like coffee, some people do. 23 million accounts on the Starbucks app so someone likes it. That’s ok , at least donuts are not against wow so obviously much healthier choice. 😂

Not interested in being dragged into a rancorous back-and-forth about the Word of Wisdom. Engage somebody else, if that’s what you want. 

Edited by Scott Lloyd
Link to comment
On 6/7/2021 at 11:25 PM, Scott Lloyd said:

Not convinced you have laid anything bare here, but goodnight to you. 
 

Added later: Here’s a question for you to ponder once you have calmed down: Were the Church leaders wrong to have not carried publicly accessible, live broadcasts of the priesthood session for all those years? Why or why not?

It appears bsjkki does not intend to respond to this question, so I invite others to consider and reply to it. I think it’s very much germane to the thread topic. 

Link to comment
5 hours ago, secondclasscitizen said:

Some people don’t like coffee, some people do. 23 million accounts on the Starbucks app so someone likes it. That’s ok , at least donuts are not against wow so obviously much healthier choice. 😂

Apps often give free stuff and discounts.  Starbucks has hot chocolate, ciders, various sweets.  Don't they also do tea? So while I think the majority of the 23 million like coffee, Is be willing to bet not all do.

Link to comment
4 minutes ago, Rain said:

Apps often give free stuff and discounts.  Starbucks has hot chocolate, ciders, various sweets.  Don't they also do tea? So while I think the majority of the 23 million like coffee, Is be willing to bet not all do.

I regret my part in drawing this thread off topic by discussing donuts, but I wish we could bring it back on topic. 

Link to comment
3 minutes ago, Scott Lloyd said:

I regret my part in drawing this thread off topic by discussing donuts, but I wish we could bring it back on topic. 

So do I, but I’m too weak-willed to get back on topic. 

Link to comment
23 minutes ago, Rain said:

Apps often give free stuff and discounts.  Starbucks has hot chocolate, ciders, various sweets.  Don't they also do tea? So while I think the majority of the 23 million like coffee, Is be willing to bet not all do.

My wife loves Starbucks. She gets this salted caramel drink that is crazy good. If I'm a good boy I get to lick the salt off the whip cream😁

Link to comment
6 minutes ago, AtlanticMike said:

My wife loves Starbucks. She gets this salted caramel drink that is crazy good. If I'm a good boy I get to lick the salt off the whip cream😁

I like their flat white. 

Link to comment
56 minutes ago, Scott Lloyd said:

It appears bsjkki does not intend to respond to this question, so I invite others to consider and reply to it. I think it’s very much germane to the thread topic. 

It could be that after you implied she was being irrational, she didn't see the point in continuing the discussion.  

Quote

Were the Church leaders wrong to have not carried publicly accessible, live broadcasts of the priesthood session for all those years? Why or why not?

Are you asking if the church leaders sinned by not offering public accessible live broadcasts of the priesthood sessions?

Link to comment
51 minutes ago, Rain said:

Apps often give free stuff and discounts.  Starbucks has hot chocolate, ciders, various sweets.  Don't they also do tea? So while I think the majority of the 23 million like coffee, Is be willing to bet not all do.

Starbucks has some really yummy non-coffee, non-tea drinks.  And lots of food options too.

Link to comment
1 hour ago, Scott Lloyd said:
On 6/7/2021 at 10:25 PM, Scott Lloyd said:

Not convinced you have laid anything bare here, but goodnight to you. 
 

Added later: Here’s a question for you to ponder once you have calmed down: Were the Church leaders wrong to have not carried publicly accessible, live broadcasts of the priesthood session for all those years? Why or why not?

It appears bsjkki does not intend to respond to this question, so I invite others to consider and reply to it. I think it’s very much germane to the thread topic. 

Church leaders were not wrong. There was a time when it was right because women were mostly uninterested in what was being said in the Priesthood session. 
Also the general public would not understand nor care what was being said. Times change and interests change, so it was made more accessible to everyone.
I think they were able to reach a bigger audience of priesthood holders with live broadcasts.

Link to comment
8 minutes ago, JAHS said:

Church leaders were not wrong. There was a time when it was right because women were mostly uninterested in what was being said in the Priesthood session. 
Also the general public would not understand nor care what was being said. Times change and interests change, so it was made more accessible to everyone.
I think they were able to reach a bigger audience of priesthood holders with live broadcasts.

And you know that, how, exactly?

3Ht8P1.jpg

Link to comment
4 minutes ago, bluebell said:

I know a lot of women were reading the priesthood session talks long before they could watch it live, for example.

I've mentioned this before many times, but my branch in the Caribbean showed up en masse to watch both the priesthood session on Saturday night and the women's session the Saturday before (as it then was). Men, women, children all came together. When I asked about this, the response was, 'Why would you miss an opportunity to listen to the prophets?'

I still quote Sherri Dew from the talk I heard her give in the women's session that year!

Edited by Hamba Tuhan
Link to comment
10 minutes ago, Hamba Tuhan said:

I've mentioned this before many times, but my branch in the Caribbean showed up en masse to watch both the priesthood session on Saturday night and the women's session the Saturday before (as it then was). Men, women, children all came together. When I asked about this, the response was, 'Why would you miss an opportunity to listen to the prophets?'

I still quote Sherri Dew from the talk I heard her give in the women's session that year!

And it's interesting that your leaders never thought they needed to prohibit women and children from being there.  

Link to comment
Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...