Uncategorized

General Conference Open Thread

This is an open thread to discuss the words of the October 2007 general conference.

Published by

Kim Siever

Queer Mormon poet with radical political views. I have been married 27 years, and we have 6 children. Sunday school president. Served in the Utah Provo Mission.

69 thoughts on “General Conference Open Thread”

  1. Sounds like the same old same old…anything controversial or new announced? I didn’t catch the conference.

  2. re: #2, I wasn’t aware that Elder Didier was an apostle.

    re: #11, Church != Gospel.

    re: #34, Revelation for who to call may not be part of your calling. You’d have to check the little chart in the handbook (book 1, I think) to see who has the responsibility to call and release.

    Basically, if you don’t have the authority to call or release them, you won’t receive revelation for who to call.

  3. That’s because he was a seventy. :)

    Right. But that still doesn’t mean that people won’t interpret the comment to mean the church has all truth.

    I disagree. I have received revelation on callings for those I never called. Most recently on the counsellors I currently have. In fact, I was the only person to have prayed about the names.

  4. re: the third point,

    I’m not sure where I stand on that. The handbook states that you are to recommend names for calling in consultation with the bishop, but the stake president(cy) is the one who issues the call and release.

    So, I guess there is provision for you to receive some inspiration, but you aren’t the final say (unlike with your secretary, instructors, or committee chairmen / members. You’re the point man on all of those).

    That being said, I feel that I knew 100% who my counselors should have been, but the bishop always trumped me and vetoed my recommendation. My stake president always sided with the bishop. I feel they were both wrong.

    Who knows… It’s not like it made any difference anyway.

  5. “Woo hoo! He’s my favourite apostle.”

    Just curious, what makes an apostle a favorite?

  6. I think I’ve been lucky. My bishop has always been supportive of who I call (or recommend to call).

    For me, the way he presents his talks. Which is why I was so excited; I get to hear him speak multiple times during each conference.

  7. “I wonder though whether some revelations supersede others.”

    Just thinking more about this, by definition, can that even happen? Under what circumstances can God give one person revelation “A” about a subject and another person revelation “B” about the same subject (at the same time)?

  8. I’ve seen it appear to happen several times. The Primary president prays about a teacher, for example, and feels inspired toward a particular name. When the bishopric prays about the name, they feel the person should be somewhere else.

    I don’t know the cause of the difference, but I have seen it several times.

  9. To me it makes as much sense as there being multiple forms of baptism.

  10. “I don’t know the cause of the difference”

    Well obviously one of the two is less righteous – the trick is to find out which one so you can rule out his opinion. ;)

  11. I’m going to be the devils advocate here. C’mon guys, if there is a God, do you think he would even care about who was called as a primary teacher-or councillor for that matter (much less the procedures outlined in the General Handbook of Instructions) . Why not just choose someone who you think has the time, would do a good job, maybe even likes kids, and is faithful, and let God deal with issues like the genocide in Darfur, or the war in Iraq…

  12. Why wouldn’t he, Dustin? If God is concerned for the instruction of his children (and we don’t need to read far into the scriptures to find support for that), why wouldn’t he care a good teacher is called to instruct those children (young or grown adults)?

    If God is concerned for a single sparrow or if he counts the hair on our head (see Luke 12:6-7), surely he must care for how we are taught.

  13. I guess my point is this. He will step in and help you and all other LDS priesthood authorities find a primary teacher or librarian or activities chairperson or whatever-every time. But he won’t step in to save 100s of thousands of innocent people from genocide or save a child from cancer, or stop suicide bombers, etc.? It doesn’t compute for me.

  14. Althought I don’t agree with your reasoning, more and more I am agreeing with the end result.

    There may be situations where He wants a certain individual to do a certain job, but I think most of the time, there are probably lots of choices and he leaves it up to us. Not much inspiration there.

    Regarding the war, etc… having the freedom to choose also means having the freedom to live with the consequences. If he stepped in all the time, we wouldn’t really be free.

  15. He will step in and help you and all other LDS priesthood authorities find a primary teacher or librarian or activities chairperson or whatever-every time

    I guess it depends on what you man by “step in and help”. I’ve never been told to call such-and-such a person. I’ve always made the decision on my own and then gone to him for confirmation. I’m not sure I would go so far as calling that “stepping in and helping”. It seems “stepping in and helping” is more invasive than my methods.

    he won’t step in to save 100s of thousands of innocent people from genocide or save a child from cancer, or stop suicide bombers

    Considering the fact that people who do not die from genocide or cancer or suicide bombers are not reported, I don’t say that we can say with absolute certainty that he never stops genocide, or never stops cancer, or never stops suicide bombers. Just because genocide, cancer and suicide bombing happen some of the time, doesn’t mean that every possible instance of them are carried out.

    But I do have to agree with, JM. If he were to interfere with every situation so there was always a paradisaical outcome, what would have been the point in coming to earth? Why not just stay in heaven with him?

    In addition, it would also mean the opportunity to make bad choices (and thus have really freedom of choice) would be taken away. We might as well all have sided with Lucifer then.

  16. Those are really good points and I’m obviously being a bit dramatic here. I know the free agency/choice component to this. That God can’t possibly alter the course of every disease or crazy dictator. It sounds to me like there may be a culture of personal revelation at play here. Whether it be a young suitor telling his girlfriend that it was revealed to him that they are to marry, or the family who feels inspired to move or have more kids etc. I remember praying that I would do well on an exam and if I did well, I was blessed, if not it was a test of faith and I should try harder. I just wonder how often one counts the hits and ignores the misses? I don’t see any way around it though, considering the culture and language of Mormonism. It is all so completely subjective. Why not just say, I want so and so to be in such and such calling, or I want to move to such and such place? What is really going on here, I wonder?

  19. Good posts Kim. It’s an interesting discussion.
    Thanks for letting me put my two cents in.
    Cheers!

Comments are closed.