What do you think President Nelson meant?

[mirkwood]

JAG's context was the "apocalypse" was a long way off.  I was disagreeing.

[Just_A_Guy]

49 minutes ago, Mores said:

Mirkwood,

Doesn't your statement actually contradict JAG's statement?  The multi-year project which Pres. Nelson is initiating may not be finished in his lifetime, nor prior to the Second Coming.  It may be completed afterward.  

JAG,

The works of God continue even through the apocalypse.   They continue even into the Millennium.   Why would commencing such a project indicate that the Second Coming is a ways off?

My thought process wasn’t that the works of God cease; it was that the sorts of events we often associate with the Second Coming (breakdown of the US Government, abandonment of Salt Lake as Church headquarters in favor of a return to Missouri, etc) seem in the short term incongruous with the degree of investment that the Church is making in an already-perfectly-functional property that could be confiscated by a hostile government or mob with relative ease.

Moreover, the planned temple safety upgrades suggest the Church is planning for some earthquakes; whereas I’ve always suspected that in the Millennium earthquakes won’t be a major threat to human life or limb.  These all suggested to me that the Church may not be anticipating the conventional “doodie-hits-the-fan-and-then-Christ-returns” scenario anytime in the next decade or two.  Or alternatively, maybe it thinks that no matter how bad things get in the run-up to the Second Coming, we’ll be able to hold on to the temple.

Or maybe, as @LiterateParakeet suggests, it’s intended to be a Nauvoo-Temple sort of sacrifice.

Edited May 1, 2019 by Just_A_Guy

[CV75]

18 hours ago, carlimac said:

In one of his Conference talks he said, " Now, as President of His Church, I plead with you who have distanced yourselves from the Church and with you who have not yet really sought to know that the Savior’s Church has been restored. Do the spiritual work to find out for yourselves, and please do it now. Time is running out."

I put the whole paragraph in there for context but I doubt anyone has forgotten that last part that I bolded. 

One of my daughter's Young Women advisors mentioned it in a lesson and went on and on saying things like that apocalypse has already started and we are on a sinking ship on this earth, etc, etc. On the other hand I have a child who reminded me that Elder Packer ( I believe) said not that many years ago that the youth of the church can count on having long lives on this earth- of seeing their children and grandchildren grow to adulthood. So...hmmm. 

Another take on this. My son who claims to be agnostic and has been inactive for a couple years feels Pres. Nelson's statement was meant to intimidate. ( Backstory- this son is in medical school and has great respect for President Nelson, but he didn't like how this came across. He didn't hear it himself but his older sister shared it with him. )  He said it undermined the invitation to do the spiritual work to find out. That it was meant to scare rather than to encourage. 

What does anyone else think was behind that statement? 

In addiiotn to @Vort's comment, I think the various societal pressures that influence one to remain distanced will only increase.

[The Folk Prophet]

2 hours ago, Mores said:

Dictionary.com may be helpful.

Right:

So a threat is a warning but a warning isn't always a threat. And a threat, as pointed out by dictionary.com, is a warning from an individual that said individual will inflict harm.

So unless Pres. Nelson said "I will come into your bedroom at night and punish you unless you don't act," it cannot be, dictionary-wise, a threat.

So taking it as threatening when he isn't implying he himself will retaliate is silly.

[mirkwood]

1 hour ago, Just_A_Guy said:

abandonment of Salt Lake as Church headquarters in favor of a return to Missouri, etc

What most people miss on this topic is that the move of church HQ to Missouri is not a move of the full population of the Saints to Missouri.  There will be many who remain in their homes and not go to Missiouri.

[Anddenex]

1 hour ago, The Folk Prophet said:

Right:

So a threat is a warning but a warning isn't always a threat. And a threat, as pointed out by dictionary.com, is a warning from an individual that said individual will inflict harm.

So unless Pres. Nelson said "I will come into your bedroom at night and punish you unless you don't act," it cannot be, dictionary-wise, a threat.

So taking it as threatening when he isn't implying he himself will retaliate is silly.

 

[dprh]

Pres. Nelson's words hit very close to home for me.  In March, I went through a Stake Disciplinary Council and was subsequently excommunicated for conduct unbecoming a member.  I have a long history of leading a double life in and out of the church.  I confessed to my wife, my bishop, my Stake President, and God in January and I've been working on changing, repenting, since.  For so long, I felt that I couldn't change.  I was too weak, too cowardly, too deep into my sinful life to ever be able to get better.  And I was right.  I am not strong enough, on my own, to change.  What I'm in the process of learning is that I am not alone.  I am doing what I can and Christ is making up the difference.  I have felt my heart change.  I still have a long road ahead, but I have the Savior walking beside me.  

That is my long way of saying, I feel that time is short for me specifically.  Not in that my life will end soon or that the Second Coming is next year, but that my need to repent, to change, to become who I need to be, is now.  I cannot procrastinate any more.  

[Traveler]

16 hours ago, Just_A_Guy said:

I agree with @LiterateParakeet.  I think *something* is coming, and I think the days of it being socially acceptable to be a member of this church are nearing their end (at least for the rest of my foreseeable lifetime).  But, consider that we are about to embark upon an intensive four-year, multi-million dollar renovation and seismic upgrade of the Salt Lake Temple; and that President Nelson is statistically likely to be either dead or a vegetable by the time it’s done.  This is purely speculative, of course; but I don’t think he’d have begun a project like that if he were expecting an American apocalypse in the next decade or two.

I have seen a lot of changes in America and the Church during my lifetime - I am of the mind more (and greater division) is coming soon.  It is critical to strengthen our testimonies and commitments to G-d and his Kingdom.

 

The Traveler

[Guest Mores]

3 hours ago, The Folk Prophet said:

Right:

So a threat is a warning but a warning isn't always a threat. And a threat, as pointed out by dictionary.com, is a warning from an individual that said individual will inflict harm.

So unless Pres. Nelson said "I will come into your bedroom at night and punish you unless you don't act," it cannot be, dictionary-wise, a threat.

So taking it as threatening when he isn't implying he himself will retaliate is silly.

Specifically, I was trying to imply that a "warning" may be done out of love.  But a "threat" is always done out of ... not love... Forgive my lack of vocabulary at the moment.

[The Folk Prophet]

1 hour ago, Mores said:

Specifically, I was trying to imply that a "warning" may be done out of love.  But a "threat" is always done out of ... not love... Forgive my lack of vocabulary at the moment.

Totally unimportant debate...but...just for fun:

I'm not sure a "threat" is always done out of malice. (I believe that's the word you were looking for...no?)

Or selfishness. Or whatever.

If I threaten my child with a (insert punishment ... spanking, timeout, no dessert...etc) if they don't stop hitting their sibling it's still a threat even if it comes from a place of love.

[Guest Mores]

1 hour ago, The Folk Prophet said:

Totally unimportant debate...but...just for fun:

I'm not sure a "threat" is always done out of malice. (I believe that's the word you were looking for...no?)

Or selfishness. Or whatever.

If I threaten my child with a (insert punishment ... spanking, timeout, no dessert...etc) if they don't stop hitting their sibling it's still a threat even if it comes from a place of love.

Yes, that is all true.  And selfishness & malice is about what I was trying to say.  Unfortunately, the explanation of the nuances here is limited by mortal tongues.

What I believe as you say --  that even when we "threaten" we can do it in such a way that it is with the intent of hope and benefit of those we love vs doing so out of selfishness or malice.  But there is no differentiation in some people's minds when the word "threaten" is used.

[askandanswer]

There were several instances in early latter day history when the Lord told the saints to treat their new dwelling place  as if it was their permanent home and as though they were going to be there for a long time even though the Lord knew as He was telling them that they would soon be forced to move along yet again. 

[carlimac]

16 hours ago, Anddenex said:

 

 Your son though isn't a child learning how to tie his shoes. He is going through medical school. 

I am sorry carlimac, the decision of your son must bring heartache and tears at times (I would think), and the desire to love and protect him is always the state of a loving mother.

Yes and he's at the end of his 2nd year and studying for his first STEP exam.(otherwise known as boards )  He's consumed with studying the human body right now and hoping to pass so he can continue on to hospital rotations. The fact that he is even thinking about how religion and science are related right now is something of a miracle. Also he says he has already given the whole thing lots and lots of his time and pondering throughout undergrad at BYU and during his mission. He doesn't think studying it all again would change his mind. I think that's true unless he drops some of his intellectual thinking and allows the spirit to teach him. 

Yes it's heartbreaking. But at least he's not a criminal on drugs or in prison. There are worse places he could be. He's a very loving and compassionate person trying his best to do good things in the world. 

Edited May 2, 2019 by carlimac

[Emmanuel Goldstein]

On 4/30/2019 at 2:28 PM, mordorbund said:

If Jesus returns tonight, will this statement be falsified?

Even if Jesus were to return tomorrow, there is no reason to think that all mankind will die. Youth growing up now may very well have a long and fruitful life in the Millennial world.

[Emmanuel Goldstein]

On 4/30/2019 at 5:37 PM, Just_A_Guy said:

But, consider that we are about to embark upon an intensive four-year, multi-million dollar renovation and seismic upgrade of the Salt Lake Temple; and that President Nelson is statistically likely to be either dead or a vegetable by the time it’s done.  

Why would you assume that he will be dead or vegetative in 5 years? He is one of the most healthy 94 years-olds I have ever seen.

[Just_A_Guy]

7 minutes ago, Emmanuel Goldstein said:

Why would you assume that he will be dead or vegetative in 5 years? He is one of the most healthy 94 years-olds I have ever seen.

He’ll be 99.  I’d love to be wrong, but statistics are decidedly against him.  

[Traveler]

15 minutes ago, Just_A_Guy said:

He’ll be 99.  I’d love to be wrong, but statistics are decidedly against him.  

Eventually we will all end up dead or vegetative.  There is no logic in that; to not do all we can for good and what ought to be done now.

 

The Traveler

[Emmanuel Goldstein]

27 minutes ago, Traveler said:

Eventually we will all end up dead or vegetative.  There is no logic in that; to not do all we can for good and what ought to be done now.

 

The Traveler

Just seems rather negative. 

[Alaris]

I believe this is to what President Nelson is referring when he says time is running out:

3 Nephi 16:10 And thus commandeth the Father that I should say unto you: At that day when the Gentiles shall sin against my gospel, and shall reject the fulness of my gospel, and shall be lifted up in the pride of their hearts above all nations, and above all the people of the whole earth, and shall be filled with all manner of lyings, and of deceits, and of mischiefs, and all manner of hypocrisy, and murders, and priestcrafts, and whoredoms, and of secret abominations; and if they shall do all those things, and shall reject the fulness of my gospel, behold, saith the Father, I will bring the fulness of my gospel from among them.

11 And then will I remember my covenant which I have made unto my people, O house of Israel, and I will bring my gospel unto them.

12 And I will show unto thee, O house of Israel, that the Gentiles shall not have power over you; but I will remember my covenant unto you, O house of Israel, and ye shall come unto the knowledge of the fulness of my gospel.

President & Sister Nelson spoke on the gathering of Israel last year (iirc) and said there is no more important mission for the youth to consider at this time. The endowment change occurred after that which, to me, is a signal of the changing time and seasons. Rather than referring to the second coming, I believe President Nelson is referring to the Gathering of Israel - and a careful read of verse 10 above indicates there may be some changes in how the church interfaces with the gentiles.

[Guest LiterateParakeet]

11 hours ago, Alaris said:

Rather than referring to the second coming, I believe President Nelson is referring to the Gathering of Israel - and a careful read of verse 10 above indicates there may be some changes in how the church interfaces with the gentiles.

Welcome Alaris!   I like your idea the Pres. Nelson is referring to the Gathering of Israel, he has made it clear on more than one occasion that this should be a top priority.  However, I don't think it's an either/or with the Second Coming.  The Gathering of Israel is positively correlated with the Second Coming. 

[Alaris]

19 hours ago, LiterateParakeet said:

Welcome Alaris!   I like your idea the Pres. Nelson is referring to the Gathering of Israel, he has made it clear on more than one occasion that this should be a top priority.  However, I don't think it's an either/or with the Second Coming.  The Gathering of Israel is positively correlated with the Second Coming. 

Thank you! The Gathering comes first before the second coming, I believe. Sequence isn't my specialty, but I'm starting to delve into this more:

Moses 7:62 And righteousness will I send down out of heaven; and truth will I send forth out of the earth, to bear testimony of mine Only Begotten; his resurrection from the dead; yea, and also the resurrection of all men; and righteousness and truth will I cause to sweep the earth as with a flood, to gather out mine elect from the four quarters of the earth, unto a place which I shall prepare, an Holy City, that my people may gird up their loins, and be looking forth for the time of my coming; for there shall be my tabernacle, and it shall be called Zion, a New Jerusalem.

63 And the Lord said unto Enoch: Then shalt thou and all thy city meet them there, and we will receive them into our bosom, and they shall see us; and we will fall upon their necks, and they shall fall upon our necks, and we will kiss each other;