General Conference Suggestions

[Lykos]

As you listen, read, or watch general conference
Remember that it is very possible that many of the messages are not for you and your circumstances specifically. They are for the church as a whole, which is made up of a very wide range of peoples, cultures, backgrounds, countries, languages, etc.

Thus there will be many things that frankly dont apply to you, but are still good advice and application of general principles.

Find the talk or portion of a talk that is for you. Prepare your heart and ask the Lord to teach you. Then listen.

If you're not a bishop, the talk about being a bishop is probably not for you, unless you need more to be more sympathetic to your bishop's challenges or are going to be called as bishop soon, or whatever else might be taught.

If you're not racist, the talk about not being racist isn't for you.

If you're all stocked and stacked and ready for the years for famine that will come, the talk about food storage is not for you.

If you're already worthily attending the temple regularly and being taught by the Lord in his House, then the pleadings of his apostles for us to carve out time, to give up unholy things and become clean so we can be pure before the Lord in his Holy Temple... Those talks are not for you.

If you're not beating and abusing your wife, those condemning such behavior and calling those to repentance are not directed to you.

And so it can go.

But if you humble yourself and ask the Lord, What Lack I yet? He will tell you.

[Dave62]

Thank you, Lykos. This is really good advice.

[JK4Woods]

I wish conference was less preaching to the choir…

And more calling the world to repentance.
Be the city on the hill…

Tell it like it’s going to be…

Some hellfire and damnation would be more effective and pleasing to the Lord, than trying to gather more frogs into the pot….

The TBM’s could be smug in their salvation, and the controversy might awaken the slothful, and give a clear voice of repentance to the wicked.

Doesn’t matter if people are offended in their sins. Does t matter if some countries close their doors to missionary work, doesn’t matter if the church gets bad press, or scathing protests or becomes an enemy to wokeness.

The Path to Heaven is a Strait and Narrow one. Not the wide sunny beach where everyone will be saved.

The contrast must be made. The division is the whole point.

Those who choose to follow Jesus Christ walk a different path than the wide and broad way to hell and damnation.

Start cleansing the church, then when lean and strong, start cleansing the earth…


The church is waay too rich, and waay too prideful.
Repent! Sell all and give to the poor. Get out of the stupor you are under…

[Fight for the right]

As you listen, read, or watch general conference
Remember that it is very possible that many of the messages are not for you and your circumstances specifically. They are for the church as a whole, which is made up of a very wide range of peoples, cultures, backgrounds, countries, languages, etc.

Thus there will be many things that frankly dont apply to you, but are still good advice and application of general principles.

Find the talk or portion of a talk that is for you. Prepare your heart and ask the Lord to teach you. Then listen.

If you're not a bishop, the talk about being a bishop is probably not for you, unless you need more to be more sympathetic to your bishop's challenges or are going to be called as bishop soon, or whatever else might be taught.

If you're not racist, the talk about not being racist isn't for you.

If you're all stocked and stacked and ready for the years for famine that will come, the talk about food storage is not for you.

If you're already worthily attending the temple regularly and being taught by the Lord in his House, then the pleadings of his apostles for us to carve out time, to give up unholy things and become clean so we can be pure before the Lord in his Holy Temple... Those talks are not for you.

If you're not beating and abusing your wife, those condemning such behavior and calling those to repentance are not directed to you.

And so it can go.

But if you humble yourself and ask the Lord, What Lack I yet? He will tell you.

I have a hard time listening to any of it. I think in days of old General authority's were able to speak from their heart with the power of the Holy Spirit. It's not like that anymore. I want to listen to a man who is on fire and courageous and not afraid to speak about the sins of these days.

[Fight for the right]

I wish conference was less preaching to the choir…

And more calling the world to repentance.
Be the city on the hill…

Tell it like it’s going to be…

Some hellfire and damnation would be more effective and pleasing to the Lord, than trying to gather more frogs into the pot….

The TBM’s could be smug in their salvation, and the controversy might awaken the slothful, and give a clear voice of repentance to the wicked.

Doesn’t matter if people are offended in their sins. Does t matter if some countries close their doors to missionary work, doesn’t matter if the church gets bad press, or scathing protests or becomes an enemy to wokeness.

The Path to Heaven is a Strait and Narrow one. Not the wide sunny beach where everyone will be saved.

The contrast must be made. The division is the whole point.

Those who choose to follow Jesus Christ walk a different path than the wide and broad way to hell and damnation.

Start cleansing the church, then when lean and strong, start cleansing the earth…


The church is waay too rich, and waay too prideful.
Repent! Sell all and give to the poor. Get out of the stupor you are under…

Thanks JK. AGREED 100 PERCENT

[MikeMaillet]

Funny but I always thought General Conference to be a snore fest. Everything about it was stuffy and boring such as the business suits, everything made out of wood 12" thick, the churchy organ music and then there were the talks where each speaker speaks in a drab monotone. With some exceptions the messages were typically bland and cozy, lest we offend someone. I remember when many members used the expression "tender mercies" following some GA talk (probably Bednar) as if it was some pearl of wisdom.

I'm Canadian and early April is the time when I want to be outside to get some air and some sun following a long, dreary winter. Instead, I used to pack up the family to go watch hours of absolute boredom. You would think that with the world in its current state that church authorities would have plenty to talk about that is of interest and pertinence to its members.

Mike

[Jamescm]

When speakers during a conference follow the same clearly and even demonstrably false public narratives of "racism", "white supremacy", and "intolerance", then it is hard to suppose that any of them will accidently speak some point that is of sound advice or interest to any individual actually seeking further light and knowledge. The closest thing to a talk on something actually socially true and relevant in the past few years I can remember was one on religious liberty, after normies/sheeple/&c began to clue into the lies of the covid narrative (pushed by speakers at general conference, and yet to be addressed or withdrawn in hindsight) realized that something was up and began pushing back against mandates... Then when push came to shove, not the slightest pushback against renewed mandates came from the same person who spoke such, or the organization he represented.

I'm not interested in wading through talks about how we should gently tolerate sodomy while chastising straight pornography, or discussing our need for peace and ending racism during the media's false frenzies but without a word when it's proven false or the victims are whites targeted by race. Racism? Why am I lectured on racism when every time I end up seeing a picture or drawing of some family in some Church periodical, it is non-white or mixed race? When the Gadianton robber Obama spent years allowing the separation of children from families and keeping them in cages, the Church didn't say a word. The instant Donald Trump took office (who at worst at least pretends to fight back against "the swamp"), the media starts shouting "Kids in cages! Kids in cages!" and the Church joins the chorus. Elder Oaks spoke of Trump as "dangerous" once he took office, despite turning out to be the only president in the modern era not to have begun a war, who walked into North Korea, and who reduced tensions in the middle east. If The Lord doesn't direct me specifically to sit and listen through conference, He isn't going to cause anyone speaking to accidently tell me something relevant to my family or I.

It is not how I want affairs to be. I sustain them as the chosen prophets of the Lord, whether or not they do a perceivably good job of it. I'm not an anti-Mormon or an ex-Mormon, but I'm not a True-Blue Mormon, either.

[JohnnyL]

While a lot might seem like it doesn't apply... most of it does. Here's how I found out since two-three GC's ago:

It was hard to get through 10 hours in 2 days. I nodded off during some talks, stayed awake in body but was often absent in mind, etc.

On Monday morning, we began listening to the talks, and did so most every morning since. I guess we've listened to the talks 10+ times. I've gained something from every talk, even the ones I didn't like/ wasn't impressed with the first (or even first few) times around. I've found many gems. I was able to gain something from each talk, and much more from some, like Elder Christofferson and President Nelson's talks.

The first time I heard this ("listen to GC talks every morning"), I rolled my eyes. Then in the GC, President Nelson shared a story about this, and I guess I was finally humble enough for the Spirit to nudge me. I can now strongly suggest this to everyone.

I might not appreciate every speaker's voice, mannerisms, personality, content (a few parts) and might not be able to vouch for their lifestyles or correctness, or righteousness. (I mean, President Nelson couldn't just say "man", and had to insert "anyone" instead in his part on abuse??!!!)

P.S. I wrote and gave a talk, which I thought was deep and original. After listening to GC talks the month after my talk, I chuckled each time I heard something that was part of my talk (even if not exact).

[Reluctant Watchman]

Bummer, I thought I could be taught by the Lord "outside" such fine sanctuaries.

[JK4Woods]

As you listen, read, or watch general conference
Remember that it is very possible that many of the messages are not for you and your circumstances specifically. They are for the church as a whole, which is made up of a very wide range of peoples, cultures, backgrounds, countries, languages, etc.

Thus there will be many things that frankly dont apply to you, but are still good advice and application of general principles.

Find the talk or portion of a talk that is for you. Prepare your heart and ask the Lord to teach you. Then listen.

If you're not a bishop, the talk about being a bishop is probably not for you, unless you need more to be more sympathetic to your bishop's challenges or are going to be called as bishop soon, or whatever else might be taught.

If you're not racist, the talk about not being racist isn't for you.

If you're all stocked and stacked and ready for the years for famine that will come, the talk about food storage is not for you.

If you're already worthily attending the temple regularly and being taught by the Lord in his House, then the pleadings of his apostles for us to carve out time, to give up unholy things and become clean so we can be pure before the Lord in his Holy Temple... Those talks are not for you.

If you're not beating and abusing your wife, those condemning such behavior and calling those to repentance are not directed to you.

And so it can go.

But if you humble yourself and ask the Lord, What Lack I yet? He will tell you.

I have a hard time listening to any of it. I think in days of old General authority's were able to speak from their heart with the power of the Holy Spirit. It's not like that anymore. I want to listen to a man who is on fire and courageous and not afraid to speak about the sins of these days.

LeGrand Richards…. He would get wound up, with pitch and pace of his sermon increasing as he got closer to the mark. He always seemed to preach repent and forgiveness….

The other of the Twelve would let him go…

[The Red Pill]

I used to take conference seriously...

But then came the urging of the deadly "Godsend".

Let's not discount the implication of what happened here. Urging a deadly poison upon the ENTIRE membership immediately takes them OUT OF the cannot lead you astray club...and puts them smack dab in the middle of the WE CAN MOST CERTAINLY...AND DID... lead you astray club.

Think about that...deeply.

But...cognitive dissonance is alive and well...so we see people lining up to hear more. Kinda like continuing to contribute to Jim and Tammy Baker AFTER their cover was blown???

Personally, I am not looking for "seeing around corners" advice from these guys...

[Rumpelstiltskin]

I've mentioned this before, but I'll mention it again. I have every magazine published by the Church since its inception that is available on PDF. That comes to more than 9200 magazines. I began collecting them in 2013. Since then, I have been researching them and on various topics, I have gone through all of them. A few years ago, I began noticing differences in how the various topics were addressed from then to now. During the first 100 years, the articles were full of deeper doctrine and/or a much more in-depth teaching of basic doctrines. The articles called a spade a spade and were blunt, in-your-face, and completely unapologetic in calling out sin and transgression. I remember one article that concluded with (paraphrased), "If what I've written is offensive to you, don't let the door hit you on the way out." During the 1920's at the direction of Heber J. Grant, there were some significant changes to the doctrines of the Gospel imposed. In 1922, baptisms for health was stopped. I found a research paper on this, "They Shall Be Made Whole: A History of Baptism for Health, and it said that the Church stopped baptisms for health because it wanted to be more in line with teachings of the world.

Uncertainty about baptism for health arose in the second decade of the twentieth century. With improvements in modern medical science and Mormonism’s more general integration into the larger society, Church leaders began to avoid ritualistic practices that, in turn, appeared increasingly magical.
Footnote 123
123The perspective that healing rituals were essentially magical was inherent in their proscription during the early Christian Reformation. Mormons at this time appear to be transitioning away from the pioneers’ magical worldview. For the modernization of medical practice, see Charles E. Rosenberg, ed., The Structure of American Medical Practice, 1875–1941 (Philavor)

Then in 1928 HJ Grant had the Lectures on Faith removed as companion reading from the Doctrine and Covenants and he also eliminated Joseph Smith's teaching that women could give blessings. This seemed to begin the degradation of the doctrines on faith and repentance, and healing. After 1930, the teachings regarding the abilities and capabilities of evil spirits began to diminish and morph into nothing more than generic, non-threatening teachings. At the same time, the blunt, in-your-face writing style of articles in the Church magazines began changing, softening to a less offensive style. Today, magazine articles drip with inoffensive intellectualism, wokeness, and the precepts of men. If you believe in what is taught today as the "doctrines" of faith and repentance, you'll end up in hell.

What is the point of all of this? In conference, we'll be getting the same water-down doctrine that we always get along with more wokeness and accusations of racism. There will be no meaningful explanations or additions to doctrine. Gone are the days of what "prophets, seers, and revelators" used to do.

And there were exceedingly many prophets among us. And the people were a stiffnecked people, hard to understand.
And there was nothing save it was exceeding harshness, preaching and prophesying of wars, and contentions, and destructions, and continually reminding them of death, and the duration of eternity, and the judgments and the power of God, and all these things—stirring them up continually to keep them in the fear of the Lord. I say there was nothing short of these things, and exceedingly great plainness of speech, would keep them from going down speedily to destruction. And after this manner do I write concerning them.
(Enos 1:22–23)

[Serragon]

I've mentioned this before, but I'll mention it again. I have every magazine published by the Church since its inception that is available on PDF. That comes to more than 9200 magazines. I began collecting them in 2013. Since then, I have been researching them and on various topics, I have gone through all of them. A few years ago, I began noticing differences in how the various topics were addressed from then to now. During the first 100 years, the articles were full of deeper doctrine and/or a much more in-depth teaching of basic doctrines. The articles called a spade a spade and were blunt, in-your-face, and completely unapologetic in calling out sin and transgression. I remember one article that concluded with (paraphrased), "If what I've written is offensive to you, don't let the door hit you on the way out." During the 1920's at the direction of Heber J. Grant, there were some significant changes to the doctrines of the Gospel imposed. In 1922, baptisms for health was stopped. I found a research paper on this, "They Shall Be Made Whole: A History of Baptism for Health, and it said that the Church stopped baptisms for health because it wanted to be more in line with teachings of the world.

Uncertainty about baptism for health arose in the second decade of the twentieth century. With improvements in modern medical science and Mormonism’s more general integration into the larger society, Church leaders began to avoid ritualistic practices that, in turn, appeared increasingly magical.
Footnote 123
123The perspective that healing rituals were essentially magical was inherent in their proscription during the early Christian Reformation. Mormons at this time appear to be transitioning away from the pioneers’ magical worldview. For the modernization of medical practice, see Charles E. Rosenberg, ed., The Structure of American Medical Practice, 1875–1941 (Philavor)

Then in 1928 HJ Grant had the Lectures on Faith removed as companion reading from the Doctrine and Covenants and he also eliminated Joseph Smith's teaching that women could give blessings. This seemed to begin the degradation of the doctrines on faith and repentance, and healing. After 1930, the teachings regarding the abilities and capabilities of evil spirits began to diminish and morph into nothing more than generic, non-threatening teachings. At the same time, the blunt, in-your-face writing style of articles in the Church magazines began changing, softening to a less offensive style. Today, magazine articles drip with inoffensive intellectualism, wokeness, and the precepts of men. If you believe in what is taught today as the "doctrines" of faith and repentance, you'll end up in hell.

What is the point of all of this? In conference, we'll be getting the same water-down doctrine that we always get along with more wokeness and accusations of racism. There will be no meaningful explanations or additions to doctrine. Gone are the days of what "prophets, seers, and revelators" used to do.

And there were exceedingly many prophets among us. And the people were a stiffnecked people, hard to understand.
And there was nothing save it was exceeding harshness, preaching and prophesying of wars, and contentions, and destructions, and continually reminding them of death, and the duration of eternity, and the judgments and the power of God, and all these things—stirring them up continually to keep them in the fear of the Lord. I say there was nothing short of these things, and exceedingly great plainness of speech, would keep them from going down speedily to destruction. And after this manner do I write concerning them.
(Enos 1:22–23)

Thank you Rumpelstiltskin. I appreciate your research and your dedication. I too wish the church would become more practical instead of abstract. I don't feel that we can currently "do" anything with the generic teachings we receive. The multitude of talks where we are given lists of things to do are all the same list of actions devoid of object.

To be practical, our leaders would need to actually specifically identify and combat the tactics of the world currently being applied. And because the good name of the Church and the good name of Russell Nelson need to be preserved, and because the collective is given more value than the individual, we remain in the abstract world of action without specific purpose. And the only specific things we can rely on to be called out are those things specifically approved by the world, even if those things don't actually exist in any meaningful way.

[Christianlee]

What will they say about China?

[JK4Woods]

What will they say about China?

Probably something about dedicating the temple site they announced… maybe a rendering of the prospective temple design.

[Subcomandante]

What will they say about China?

Probably something about dedicating the temple site they announced… maybe a rendering of the prospective temple design.

NEITHER will be presented openly in a Conference setting. In fact, I don't think it will even be presented publicly to the general Church membership, but only to the local membership in China. Either Nelson or Gong (more than likely the latter) would dedicate it, in the local language.