Jump to content

Church ends saturday evening sessions for general conference


Recommended Posts

3 minutes ago, The Nehor said:

Yeah, historically trailer parks were usually run by mom and pop setups. Now private equity firms are snapping them up and it is not going well.

Yes. When I was 17 or so we laid the sewer and water for 60 new lots at a park for a mom and pop operation. I think they ended up having 200 lots when it was sold to a big management firm for like 2 million. Just isn't the same after that.

Link to comment
2 minutes ago, Scott Lloyd said:

False dichotomy. 

So how would you phrase asking you why you choose to respond in this case by talking about leadership being pressured vs other cases when you emphasize revelation (example, temple location...going by memory so I may be mixing you up with someone else)?

Link to comment
1 hour ago, Tacenda said:

The leadership shouldn't have caved so fast. I bet once they made it possible to view online each session, it served no purpose to even separate them really or have a special meeting for each. 

I think your analysis makes sense. 
 

But as for having “caved so fast,” sometimes the prudent course is to pick one’s battles carefully. And I believe that sometimes, revelation ratifies or sustains the choice to do so. 
 

I believe that was the case with the recent scrapping of plans to build the temple in Erda. 

Link to comment
5 minutes ago, Calm said:

So how would you phrase asking you why you choose to respond in this case by talking about leadership being pressured vs other cases when you emphasize revelation (example, temple location...going by memory so I may be mixing you up with someone else)?

See my response to Tacenda. 

Link to comment
Posted (edited)
9 minutes ago, Scott Lloyd said:

See my response to Tacenda. 

This does not address why you are choosing to view the pressure as the focus in this case though as opposed to the revelation in other cases. 

Edited by Calm
Link to comment
Posted (edited)
33 minutes ago, Calm said:

This does not address why you are choosing to view the pressure as the focus in this case though as opposed to the revelation in other cases. 

Sure it does. Ponder it carefully and maybe you can figure it out. 
 

It’s revelation whether the message is to stand fast against the raging mob in one instance or to choose not to waste time and resources and escalate rancor in another instance. 
 

Consider the Lord giving ancient Israel what they wanted when they clamored for a king, even though their desire was contrary to His teaching. 
 

Consider the Lord early in this dispensation rescinding the commandment to build the temple in Missouri. 
 

Consider the Lord at length allowing Joseph Smith to let Martin Harris take the manuscript pages after having already said no so many times. 
 

Added later: Consider the commandment to disband Zion’s Camp when conditions, external and internal, no longer favored the undertaking. 

Edited by Scott Lloyd
Link to comment
17 minutes ago, Scott Lloyd said:

Sure it does. Ponder it carefully and maybe you can figure it out. 
 

It’s revelation whether the message is to stand fast against the raging mob in one instance or to choose not to waste time and resources and escalate rancor in another instance. 
 

Consider the Lord giving ancient Israel what they wanted when they clamored for a king, even though their desire was contrary to His teaching. 
 

Consider the Lord early in this dispensation rescinding the commandment to build the temple in Missouri. 
 

Consider the Lord at length allowing Joseph Smith to let Martin Harris take the manuscript pages after having already said no so many times. 

Do have any knowledge that this decision was not inspired due to other considerations? You know it’s due to outside pressures? 

Link to comment
12 hours ago, Scott Lloyd said:

This is only peripherally related, but I think they could cut down the length of stake conference sessions and not lose a great deal thereby. I’m not sure there is that much value in having them be two hours as opposed to, say, 90 minutes. 

Agreed! Stake conference is awful for people with babies and toddlers. 

Link to comment
12 hours ago, bluebell said:

https://newsroom.churchofjesuschrist.org/article/general-conference-update-june-2021

Thoughts?  

I have read a few posts from women on Facebook uplift worrying that we not be able to hear from our women leaders very often anymore with this change.  My husband is sad because he loved the priesthood session the most out of all the sessions.

I will miss some things, but it's always been too much in one day. 

Link to comment
Posted (edited)
15 minutes ago, Scott Lloyd said:

No more or less than you do that it wasn’t. 

So, none. You are are impuning this decision based on your own feelings about it. It’s nice to have that clear. 

Edited by bsjkki
Link to comment
5 minutes ago, bsjkki said:

So, none. You are are impuning this decision based on your own feelings about it. It’s nice to have that clear. 

I’m not impugning it. I’m just saying what might plausibly have led up to it. 
 

Consider the examples I cited. I don’t impugn the Lord’s decree in any of those instances, though I might find the conditions that necessitated it regrettable. 

Link to comment
Posted (edited)
19 hours ago, MorningStar said:

Agreed! Stake conference is awful for people with babies and toddlers. 

And for some of us without but who do have bony bottoms and short attention spans ...

Edited by Hamba Tuhan
Link to comment
Posted (edited)
1 hour ago, Scott Lloyd said:

I’m not impugning it. I’m just saying what might plausibly have led up to it. 

Your ‘plausibility’ without any facts equals ‘impugning’ the reasons for this change. 
 

In all of your examples, we know more about why the decisions were made. With this, you are speculating with no knowledge. You are assailing the decision as forced by critics. You don’t know anything so why imply this decision is like the others?
 

 

515040D5-94B3-4422-8717-F2B3826E099F.jpeg

Edited by bsjkki
Link to comment
1 hour ago, Scott Lloyd said:

Consider the Lord giving ancient Israel what they wanted when they clamored for a king, even though their desire was contrary to His teaching. 

Consider the Lord early in this dispensation rescinding the commandment to build the temple in Missouri. 

Consider the Lord at length allowing Joseph Smith to let Martin Harris take the manuscript pages after having already said no so many times. 

Added later: Consider the commandment to disband Zion’s Camp when conditions, external and internal, no longer favored the undertaking. 

Oohh, I like this game.

Consider the changes to the endowment in 1990, 2005, and more recent etc after member surveys to remove key blessings and tools restored through Joseph.

Consider the whole 1890 Manifesto.

Consider the 1920s changes to the garment because members complained about them.

Consider the recent announcement of the Ephraim temple.

Internal pressure is always more effective at changing the Church than external.

Link to comment

Reading the thread and it occurs to me we might want petition for one last Saturday evening GC session open to all with the theme of examining and living the 2nd Commandment with an eternal perspective.  

I, for one, know that I would benefit from such a session.

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

Your ‘plausibility’ without any facts equals ‘impuning’ the reasons for this change. 
 

In all of your examples, we know more about why the decisions were made. With this, you are speculating with no knowledge. You are assailing the decision as forced by critics. You don’t know anything so why imply this decision is like the others?
 

 

515040D5-94B3-4422-8717-F2B3826E099F.jpeg

Yes, I’m speculating, just as you are if you reject out of hand the possibility that pressure from Kate Kelly and the OW bunch played any part in the eventual decision to carry live and public  broadcasts of the priesthood session. So it’s OK for you to do it but not for me? (Again, I’m not assailing the decision to broadcast it, just the social and political pressure that might have led to it. I think the decision was the wisest course under the prevailing circumstances.)
 

By the way, I wondered whether you would correct your own misspelling of impugn once the correct spelling was modeled for you. Guess not. 

Edited by Scott Lloyd
Link to comment
21 minutes ago, JLHPROF said:

Oohh, I like this game.

Consider the changes to the endowment in 1990, 2005, and more recent etc after member surveys to remove key blessings and tools restored through Joseph.

Consider the whole 1890 Manifesto.

Consider the 1920s changes to the garment because members complained about them.

Consider the recent announcement of the Ephraim temple.

Internal pressure is always more effective at changing the Church than external.

Point taken. 
 

But can you see that these changes might well have come about via revelation and might indeed have been the wisest course at the time, even if you don’t like them or don’t like that “internal pressure” might have been the catalyst for them? 
 

As I said, I believe the Lord sometimes chooses His battles according to prudence — or rather, that He inspires His servants to. 

Link to comment
6 minutes ago, Scott Lloyd said:

By the way, I wondered whether you would correct your own misspelling of impugn once the correct spelling was modeled for you. Guess not. 

Sometimes, a persons pettiness overwhelms my desire to argue with them further. Their character is laid bare for all to see. My job is done. Good night. 😘 

Link to comment
Posted (edited)
48 minutes ago, bsjkki said:

Sometimes, a persons pettiness overwhelms my desire to argue with them further. Their character is laid bare for all to see. My job is done. Good night. 😘 

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?

Edited by Scott Lloyd
Link to comment
4 hours ago, jbarm said:

 

Just like most of those complaining about gay rights on this forum seem to be really aiming for gay temple marriage but won't say it out loud. 

If those are your real goals,  be honest about it and quit quibbling about these minor issues. 

Jb

Speaking for one gay member of this board, gay temple marriages is not what I am hoping for.  And if it ever happened in the future it would not make one bit of difference to me. 

I mostly don’t like some on this board trying to pretend the church treats LGBT the same as everyone else and other misleading notions 

You know what they say about people who make assumptions.  ..

Link to comment
14 hours ago, Scott Lloyd said:

I posted pretty much the same thing, but if ours have been cut from twice to once a year, I’m unaware of it. 
 

In our stake, it has come to be informally called “the donut meeting,” because, in order to entice youth (and men) to come to a stake meeting that early on a Sunday morning, the stake has taken to providing Krispy Kremes and milk, chocolate milk or juice after the meeting. 

People are lame if they will get out of bed for a stupid donut. Now if they start serving coffee… I’m in 😎

Link to comment
13 hours ago, amo said:

Excellent news, now there are no more excuses for NOT spending more time with the family and the community. Now they need to eliminate the endless meetings held before/after the Sunday block (administrative meetings, firesides, etc.), and, of course, implement 5th-Sunday-Home-Church...

Or simply just have two sacrament meetings a month and the rest of our time be with family, friends or whatever we want.

Link to comment
11 hours ago, jkwilliams said:

I understood that, as well, but the idea of "overrepresentation" suggests that women are outsiders. At least it does to me.

Maybe not outsiders. Their input needs to be give but they’d should  not talk too much. … so says some general authority 

Link to comment

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×
×
  • Create New...