New Predictions 2019 April GC

[Kaarno]

I was in EQ and the new stake president asked how we can better fellowship and minister to the less active brethren and their families. It was silent for a couple of minutes when a brother said that we should just leave people alone that some people are lone wolves and don't want to be bothered. I was stunned. I raised my hand and told them if they want to learn how to fellowship and show love to the less active go to primary and ask the kids, they are the best at it. they accept and love on a level we forget or outgrow.

Well there goes your Primary calling. You'll soon be in the EQ presidency or an EQ instructor. You blew it! Everyone knows that when a Priesthood leader asks a group a question the best thing you can do is give a mediocre answer. You NEVER try to impress. The guy who said to do nothing- he can relax in church because he won't get a calling. He said that on purpose

Aw crap!!!

[Col. Flagg]

Just a little tidbit I thought I'd throw out there since it was rather interesting, especially with timing... yesterday on church-owned KSL's website, there were four articles about coffee and tea, two pro and two con. The two that were con were about the dangers of drinking coffee and tea too hot and that when the temperature of these substances is 140 or hotter, there's damage to the esophageal lining to cell tissue which can double the risk of cancer. First of all, anyone dumb enough to consume ANY liquid at 140 degrees is going to make their esophagus susceptible to serious cell tissue damage which can lead to cancer and secondly, who drinks coffee or tea at a scalding 140 degrees??? The two articles that were pro coffee and tea related to the many health benefits of them and how it was far more unhealthy to consume soda, energy drinks, sugar, etc.

This is a wonderful idea- go to KSL and see what the church wants us to see.
Her'e what I found-

Candy Crush vs. Mortal Kombat?
Obviously the church wants our youth playing video games. It keeps them off facebook and instagram.
https://www.ksl.com/article/46515057/ca ... ll-of-fame

Next story, and I think this is a hidden message for the call-out peeps-

5 Tips for travelling to Jamaica.
All this time I was thinking call-out locations were in the freezing cold mountains of Utah. Not so! We're headed to Jamaica!! This is awesome!!!
https://www.ksl.com/article/46514917/5- ... to-jamaica

I used to work as a news producer in SLC, but I had, and still have, many friends at KSL. I'm here to tell you that the church doesn't dictate the news on this level. Yes, the people who work there are sensitive to who their owner is (as any news organization is), and if there is a story that is relevant to the church, it may be escalated up the ladder for further discussion of how to cover it, but day to day, it's the news people just doing the news.

Now how well those news people are doing their job is a discussion for another day...

And, yes, shadow, I know your post was a joke.

I thought it was rather telling though when that Lehi Bishop was arrested for human trafficking and KSL never even mentioned he was a Bishop of the LDS church, only an 'ecclesiastical leader'. All the other news stations mentioned he was an LDS Bishop except KSL. They never ever reported the Mormon Leaks story either of the church having $32 billion in the stock market. KSL has a vested interest in protecting the reputation of the church and if that means not reporting or disclosing the honest truth regarding a story, so be it.

[Davka]

Just a little tidbit I thought I'd throw out there since it was rather interesting, especially with timing... yesterday on church-owned KSL's website, there were four articles about coffee and tea, two pro and two con. The two that were con were about the dangers of drinking coffee and tea too hot and that when the temperature of these substances is 140 or hotter, there's damage to the esophageal lining to cell tissue which can double the risk of cancer. First of all, anyone dumb enough to consume ANY liquid at 140 degrees is going to make their esophagus susceptible to serious cell tissue damage which can lead to cancer and secondly, who drinks coffee or tea at a scalding 140 degrees??? The two articles that were pro coffee and tea related to the many health benefits of them and how it was far more unhealthy to consume soda, energy drinks, sugar, etc.

This is a wonderful idea- go to KSL and see what the church wants us to see.
Her'e what I found-

Candy Crush vs. Mortal Kombat?
Obviously the church wants our youth playing video games. It keeps them off facebook and instagram.
https://www.ksl.com/article/46515057/ca ... ll-of-fame

Next story, and I think this is a hidden message for the call-out peeps-

5 Tips for travelling to Jamaica.
All this time I was thinking call-out locations were in the freezing cold mountains of Utah. Not so! We're headed to Jamaica!! This is awesome!!!
https://www.ksl.com/article/46514917/5- ... to-jamaica

I used to work as a news producer in SLC, but I had, and still have, many friends at KSL. I'm here to tell you that the church doesn't dictate the news on this level. Yes, the people who work there are sensitive to who their owner is (as any news organization is), and if there is a story that is relevant to the church, it may be escalated up the ladder for further discussion of how to cover it, but day to day, it's the news people just doing the news.

Now how well those news people are doing their job is a discussion for another day...

And, yes, shadow, I know your post was a joke.

I thought it was rather telling though when that Lehi Bishop was arrested for human trafficking and KSL never even mentioned he was a Bishop of the LDS church, only an 'ecclesiastical leader'. All the other news stations mentioned he was an LDS Bishop except KSL. They never ever reported the Mornon Leaks story either of the church having $32 billion in the stock market. KSL has a vested interest in protecting the reputation of the church and if that means not reporting or disclosing the honest truth regarding a story, so be it.

I'm not saying that doesn't happen, but I would chalk it up to lousy, biased reporting on the part of the people in the newsroom, who are largely LDS. All it takes is a biased producer or news director and voila you have biased news. I don't think it is coming as a directive from the 12, etc.

Seriously, news in general is such a joke these days. Every individual and every outlet has its own little biases. I mean, I was a 21 year old associate producer at one point writing the political news for a major tv station in a relatively big market...looking back on it, I think what a joke! I liked Mitt Romney at the time, so you can bet that came across, for example. I knew nothing, nada more than the next person about politics. And my grandma could have been watching the news thinking she was getting info from someone in the know. I was also one of the only LDS members on my team, so when I wrote a story about the church, I guarantee it was different than my non-LDS counterparts.

I honestly cannot bring myself to read or watch regular old news anymore, because I know that most of the people behind the scenes have no special expertise, but are just regular people with opinions who know how to condense information and think they are objective. Occasionally, I run across a well- reported story, but that's the exception, not the rule. I learned cntrl +c cntrl+v working in news, because half the time we were copying wire stories from the AP or Reuters. Time and resources are short in news, especially these days. If you can pay a college student 10 bucks an hour to write something that sounds official (that was me! Not exaggerating on the pay situation either), then great! To hell with actual news.

[gemery]

I totally get the distaste for biased reporting. A blog I follow recently had a comment that linked to a Facebook group discussion. When I looked at the group, I couldn't stand the yes-man attitude of all involved. For example, someone posted the article about President Nelson saying the Rome dedication was a "hinge moment" in the history of the Church. I asked if anyone knew of more details for WHY or in WHAT WAY it was a hinge moment. The response I got: "We don't know how things will change, but the prophet said they will. That's what's so exciting!" I had to roll my eyes.

[thestock]

I was in EQ and the new stake president asked how we can better fellowship and minister to the less active brethren and their families. It was silent for a couple of minutes when a brother said that we should just leave people alone that some people are lone wolves and don't want to be bothered.

This is the correct answer. Its ok to go after people now and then, but at some point you have to respect people's wishes to be left alone. Can you imagine if we taught young men to continue to pursue girls they are interested in who are not interested in them? Teach them to continue showing up at their homes, asking them out, bringing them gifts? It would be creepy, and yet we do the same behavior. I know its a gray area, and I have been in that new EQP that wants to visit everyone including the people we dont know. But think of it from their perspective. "Oh great, a new EQP gets called and now he wants to rescue the lost sheep again."

Just be the salt of the Earth and be ready when those people return to church or reach out of their own accord. They likely will if they feel they haven't been harassed and annoyed all the time.

[Yahtzee]

I was in EQ and the new stake president asked how we can better fellowship and minister to the less active brethren and their families. It was silent for a couple of minutes when a brother said that we should just leave people alone that some people are lone wolves and don't want to be bothered.

This is the correct answer. Its ok to go after people now and then, but at some point you have to respect people's wishes to be left alone. Can you imagine if we taught young men to continue to pursue girls they are interested in who are not interested in them? Teach them to continue showing up at their homes, asking them out, bringing them gifts? It would be creepy, and yet we do the same behavior. I know its a gray area, and I have been in that new EQP that wants to visit everyone including the people we dont know. But think of it from their perspective. "Oh great, a new EQP gets called and now he wants to rescue the lost sheep again."

Just be the salt of the Earth and be ready when those people return to church or reach out of their own accord. They likely will if they feel they haven't been harassed and annoyed all the time.

I minister a sister who specifically asked to NOT have ministers assigned to her. I pawed it along to both bishop and RS pres but they continue to leave me assigned. At my interviews I always report that I haven't visited because I want to respect her request. We're going to get a new RS President this year and I'm really, really worried about this happening.

[endlessQuestions]

I was in EQ and the new stake president asked how we can better fellowship and minister to the less active brethren and their families. It was silent for a couple of minutes when a brother said that we should just leave people alone that some people are lone wolves and don't want to be bothered.

This is the correct answer. Its ok to go after people now and then, but at some point you have to respect people's wishes to be left alone. Can you imagine if we taught young men to continue to pursue girls they are interested in who are not interested in them? Teach them to continue showing up at their homes, asking them out, bringing them gifts? It would be creepy, and yet we do the same behavior. I know its a gray area, and I have been in that new EQP that wants to visit everyone including the people we dont know. But think of it from their perspective. "Oh great, a new EQP gets called and now he wants to rescue the lost sheep again."

Just be the salt of the Earth and be ready when those people return to church or reach out of their own accord. They likely will if they feel they haven't been harassed and annoyed all the time.

I minister a sister who specifically asked to NOT have ministers assigned to her. I pawed it along to both bishop and RS pres but they continue to leave me assigned. At my interviews I always report that I haven't visited because I want to respect her request. We're going to get a new RS President this year and I'm really, really worried about this happening.

I'm in the EQ Presidency, and I refuse to do "ministering visits" to people unless we've called and set an appointment with them. Is just the golden rule, isn't it? Would you want somebody just showing up on your doorstep to talk about you religious beliefs and practices? I wouldn't.

[gemery]

I'm in the EQ Presidency, and I refuse to do "ministering visits" to people unless we've called and set an appointment with them. Is just the golden rule, isn't it? Would you want somebody just showing up on your doorstep to talk about you religious beliefs and practices? I wouldn't.

I think it depends on the culture. In most parts of 'Murica, you're right.

[thestock]

I was in EQ and the new stake president asked how we can better fellowship and minister to the less active brethren and their families. It was silent for a couple of minutes when a brother said that we should just leave people alone that some people are lone wolves and don't want to be bothered.

This is the correct answer. Its ok to go after people now and then, but at some point you have to respect people's wishes to be left alone. Can you imagine if we taught young men to continue to pursue girls they are interested in who are not interested in them? Teach them to continue showing up at their homes, asking them out, bringing them gifts? It would be creepy, and yet we do the same behavior. I know its a gray area, and I have been in that new EQP that wants to visit everyone including the people we dont know. But think of it from their perspective. "Oh great, a new EQP gets called and now he wants to rescue the lost sheep again."

Just be the salt of the Earth and be ready when those people return to church or reach out of their own accord. They likely will if they feel they haven't been harassed and annoyed all the time.

I minister a sister who specifically asked to NOT have ministers assigned to her. I pawed it along to both bishop and RS pres but they continue to leave me assigned. At my interviews I always report that I haven't visited because I want to respect her request. We're going to get a new RS President this year and I'm really, really worried about this happening.

Oh it will happen. I served in an EQP where myself and all the Presidency were brand new to the calling. There are several families on the "do no contact" list. The EQP told us in our first meeting that he didnt care, we are going to go visit them. I raised my voice that I understood his intentions are good, but I would not support going to visit people who have specifically asked not to be visited. He agreed and we sent letters instead to all the individuals informing them we are new and we are respecting their wishes not to be contacted but if they ever need any help or service they can call us and we left our names, signatures, and numbers.

[thestock]

I was in EQ and the new stake president asked how we can better fellowship and minister to the less active brethren and their families. It was silent for a couple of minutes when a brother said that we should just leave people alone that some people are lone wolves and don't want to be bothered.

This is the correct answer. Its ok to go after people now and then, but at some point you have to respect people's wishes to be left alone. Can you imagine if we taught young men to continue to pursue girls they are interested in who are not interested in them? Teach them to continue showing up at their homes, asking them out, bringing them gifts? It would be creepy, and yet we do the same behavior. I know its a gray area, and I have been in that new EQP that wants to visit everyone including the people we dont know. But think of it from their perspective. "Oh great, a new EQP gets called and now he wants to rescue the lost sheep again."

Just be the salt of the Earth and be ready when those people return to church or reach out of their own accord. They likely will if they feel they haven't been harassed and annoyed all the time.

I minister a sister who specifically asked to NOT have ministers assigned to her. I pawed it along to both bishop and RS pres but they continue to leave me assigned. At my interviews I always report that I haven't visited because I want to respect her request. We're going to get a new RS President this year and I'm really, really worried about this happening.

I'm in the EQ Presidency, and I refuse to do "ministering visits" to people unless we've called and set an appointment with them. Is just the golden rule, isn't it? Would you want somebody just showing up on your doorstep to talk about you religious beliefs and practices? I wouldn't.

Amen brother. Amen. Leave the random showing up to the missionaries. In the shoes of an inactive person, I would be much less threatened by a properly dressed missionary who is just doing his job and being nice than I would be of some random dude who is just out doing busy work and probably doesnt really give two craps about me.

[shadow]

I was in EQ and the new stake president asked how we can better fellowship and minister to the less active brethren and their families. It was silent for a couple of minutes when a brother said that we should just leave people alone that some people are lone wolves and don't want to be bothered.

This is the correct answer. Its ok to go after people now and then, but at some point you have to respect people's wishes to be left alone. Can you imagine if we taught young men to continue to pursue girls they are interested in who are not interested in them? Teach them to continue showing up at their homes, asking them out, bringing them gifts? It would be creepy, and yet we do the same behavior. I know its a gray area, and I have been in that new EQP that wants to visit everyone including the people we dont know. But think of it from their perspective. "Oh great, a new EQP gets called and now he wants to rescue the lost sheep again."

Just be the salt of the Earth and be ready when those people return to church or reach out of their own accord. They likely will if they feel they haven't been harassed and annoyed all the time.

I don't necessarily disagree with that other than it's Christ who we're supposed to follow, His works are to be our works. His parable was to leave the 99 and find the 1. That's not sitting back and waiting for the 1 to wander by, that's leaving our place and going to get someone. And sure, every previous EQ presidency and/or Bishopric has stopped by in the past, but until we get a "don't come back", we're supposed to keep going back. I also agree that if someone requests no visits then we need to honor their agency by not visiting.

[Vision]

What if all the non members and inactive's got together and assigned a pair of their group to contact us each month with the intent of converting us to inactivity and non membership? We wouldn't want anything to do with them?

When we go by mandate or by assignment we are not on the Lords errand we are on a statistical mission.

[Rand]

What if all the non members and inactive's got together and assigned a pair of their group to contact us each month with the intent of converting us to inactivity and non membership? We wouldn't want anything to do with them.

When we go by mandate or by assignment we are not on the Lords errand we are on a statistical mission.

As long as we could count it, it would be great!

[thestock]

I don't necessarily disagree with that other than it's Christ who we're supposed to follow, His works are to be our works. His parable was to leave the 99 and find the 1. That's not sitting back and waiting for the 1 to wander by, that's leaving our place and going to get someone. And sure, every previous EQ presidency and/or Bishopric has stopped by in the past, but until we get a "don't come back", we're supposed to keep going back. I also agree that if someone requests no visits then we need to honor their agency by not visiting.

Thank you for this. Perhaps we are mis-interpreting the parable in this case. Sheep are ignorant and tend to wander, but they usually are pretty faithful to the Shepherd. I think Christ might be speaking about those who have wandered off mistakenly....gotten entangled into some problems they didnt anticipate and need the help. We can focus our effort on them more than on a 2 hour "how are things going in the quorum" or "lets plan the activities calendar for the next 6 months" meeting.

In the case of people who clearly no longer want to be part of the church or have a fellowship in the Church....maybe they aren't really lost sheep. They didnt wander off.....they deliberately turned their back and ran away. They are people who have had a bad experience, or who no longer feel comfortable in the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints. My experience chasing after them is to reinforce their negativity and create a justified view of us in the public as a cult that is very hard to escape from.

I am not claiming I am right and chasing down people each time a new Presidency or Bishopric is called is the wrong approach.....I am just having an open mind of what it's like to be constantly harrassed. My sister was inactive in the church for 20 years. She didnt stop believing. She didnt hate the church. She just wanted to be left alone. It used to bother her immensely when she would get random visits and have to hide to not answer the door. It made her feel like a "project". This never had a positive effect on her coming back. She came back when she decided to come back. She came back when she experienced a loneliness and a void that led her to come back on her own accord. I feel like a lot of this busy work is not just wasted effort....it can actually be damaging.

[tdj]

I was in EQ and the new stake president asked how we can better fellowship and minister to the less active brethren and their families. It was silent for a couple of minutes when a brother said that we should just leave people alone that some people are lone wolves and don't want to be bothered.

This is the correct answer. Its ok to go after people now and then, but at some point you have to respect people's wishes to be left alone. Can you imagine if we taught young men to continue to pursue girls they are interested in who are not interested in them? Teach them to continue showing up at their homes, asking them out, bringing them gifts? It would be creepy, and yet we do the same behavior. I know its a gray area, and I have been in that new EQP that wants to visit everyone including the people we dont know. But think of it from their perspective. "Oh great, a new EQP gets called and now he wants to rescue the lost sheep again."

Just be the salt of the Earth and be ready when those people return to church or reach out of their own accord. They likely will if they feel they haven't been harassed and annoyed all the time.

I minister a sister who specifically asked to NOT have ministers assigned to her. I pawed it along to both bishop and RS pres but they continue to leave me assigned. At my interviews I always report that I haven't visited because I want to respect her request. We're going to get a new RS President this year and I'm really, really worried about this happening.

I'm in the EQ Presidency, and I refuse to do "ministering visits" to people unless we've called and set an appointment with them. Is just the golden rule, isn't it? Would you want somebody just showing up on your doorstep to talk about you religious beliefs and practices? I wouldn't.

The only time I don't mind an unannounced visit is when they bring food.

[cyclOps]

I was in EQ and the new stake president asked how we can better fellowship and minister to the less active brethren and their families. It was silent for a couple of minutes when a brother said that we should just leave people alone that some people are lone wolves and don't want to be bothered.

This is the correct answer. Its ok to go after people now and then, but at some point you have to respect people's wishes to be left alone. Can you imagine if we taught young men to continue to pursue girls they are interested in who are not interested in them? Teach them to continue showing up at their homes, asking them out, bringing them gifts? It would be creepy, and yet we do the same behavior. I know its a gray area, and I have been in that new EQP that wants to visit everyone including the people we dont know. But think of it from their perspective. "Oh great, a new EQP gets called and now he wants to rescue the lost sheep again."

Just be the salt of the Earth and be ready when those people return to church or reach out of their own accord. They likely will if they feel they haven't been harassed and annoyed all the time.

I minister a sister who specifically asked to NOT have ministers assigned to her. I pawed it along to both bishop and RS pres but they continue to leave me assigned. At my interviews I always report that I haven't visited because I want to respect her request. We're going to get a new RS President this year and I'm really, really worried about this happening.

Are there any ways that you could minister to her without actually contacting her?

[tdj]

Leave the inactives alone. Seriously, the thought of continuing to contact them when they don't want to go to church, or don't even bother to try to show up for church is just so creepy. They know where the church building is, and they know how to get a hold of people on their own. I see quite a bit of pushing and pressuring, almost forcing people to do stuff, while at the same time lecturing on free agency. I don't know if this happens at every ward, but in mine there was recently a rule sent down from the stake officials that no one was to be seen sitting alone. Nice sentiment, but what about those of us who don't have the best social interaction skills who WANT to be by themselves, quietly sitting near the back? Also, in the RS society room, our group has taken to making the seating in a circular pattern vs the standard rows. When I tried to sit in the back, by myself, I was practically dragged up front into the circle. The RS president meant well, and was being very nice about it, but I haven't been to relief society meetings since then, because I just felt too uncomfortable.

[Phantom]

Funny folks around these parts. There will be complaints that modern apostles and prophets don't prophesy and then when they do they cast all doubt or demonize the prophet doing the prophesying.

Then there's this thing about predicting changes....seems to be they want to endlessly predict crazy things like modifying the Word of Wisdom or allowing gay marriage in temples. None of that stuff is going to happen.

Here's what you can REALLY count on for GC:

1. Emphasis on obedience to Gospel principles and enforced in the home
2. Personal responsibilities of husbands and wives while they are exercising priesthood power
3. Get your own family in order by targeting ordinance work for the living and the dead
4. Testifying of the BOM and emphasizing our reliance on the BOM in knowing what is happening in these latter days
5. Fewer overall meetings, "organizations" and coordination with the local ward -- everything moves into the home
6. Strong emphasis on "follow the Spirit" first, then "follow the prophet" second
7. Family history, family history, family history -- a condemnation is coming for the 98% in the church who actively avoid doing it
8. Praise to the Man -- a broad new emphasis on JS will be met with both approval and scorn, as the sifting continues
9. Tithing: still 10% of Gross and, yes, you should be paying it or put yourself in peril as His coming
10. Stop worrying about the "changes" in Church programs and start worrying about living the Gospel perosnally.

[BroDale]

I heard that new mission calls are coming with the note "the length of you mission will be announced at General Conference". Not sure if it deals with elders or sisters.

[Robin Hood]

9. Tithing: still 10% of Gross

What do you mean... "still"?

[shadow]

9. Tithing: still 10% of Gross

What do you mean... "still"?

10% of all- of everything. That's how it's always been dating back to OT times.

[RocknRoll]

9. Tithing: still 10% of Gross

What do you mean... "still"?

10% of all- of everything. That's how it's always been dating back to OT times.

D&C 119: 4
And after that, those who have thus been tithed shall pay one-tenth of all their interest annually; and this shall be a standing law unto them forever, for my holy priesthood, saith the Lord.

[shadow]

9. Tithing: still 10% of Gross

What do you mean... "still"?

10% of all- of everything. That's how it's always been dating back to OT times.

D&C 119: 4
And after that, those who have thus been tithed shall pay one-tenth of all their interest annually; and this shall be a standing law unto them forever, for my holy priesthood, saith the Lord.

Alma 13:15
And it was this same Melchizedek to whom Abraham paid tithes; yea, even our father Abraham paid tithes of one-tenth part of all he possessed.

[Robin Hood]

What do you mean... "still"?

10% of all- of everything. That's how it's always been dating back to OT times.

D&C 119: 4
And after that, those who have thus been tithed shall pay one-tenth of all their interest annually; and this shall be a standing law unto them forever, for my holy priesthood, saith the Lord.

Alma 13:15
And it was this same Melchizedek to whom Abraham paid tithes; yea, even our father Abraham paid tithes of one-tenth part of all he possessed.

Genesis 1:39 JST clarifies it. Abraham was required to pay 1/10th of all he had above that of which he had need.

[shadow]

10% of all- of everything. That's how it's always been dating back to OT times.

D&C 119: 4
And after that, those who have thus been tithed shall pay one-tenth of all their interest annually; and this shall be a standing law unto them forever, for my holy priesthood, saith the Lord.

Alma 13:15
And it was this same Melchizedek to whom Abraham paid tithes; yea, even our father Abraham paid tithes of one-tenth part of all he possessed.

Genesis 1:39 JST clarifies it. Abraham was required to pay 1/10th of all he had above that of which he had need.

We don't need to go around this circle again
The other interpretation, the one that makes more sense, is that Abraham was blessed above that which he had need and he clearly tithed on "ALL" of it.
Abram paid unto him tithes of all that he had, of all the riches which he possessed, which God had given him more than that which he had need.

But we've been down this road before. It's a spiral.