Emmanuel Goldstein Posted February 23 Report Posted February 23 I sat in Sacrament meeting this morning listening to the prelude music. “This little heart of mine” started plying and I almost pulled my hair out. Why is the church adding Creedal Christian nonsense songs? I now expect “he has the whole world in his hand” to make an appearance in the next group. Can we stick to our LDS hymns instead please?🤮 JohnsonJones and Just_A_Guy 1 1 Quote
NeuroTypical Posted February 23 Report Posted February 23 Just out of curiosity, do you have a problem with the words, or meaning, or implied beliefs, or the culture normally associated with the song, or what? https://www.churchofjesuschrist.org/media/music/songs/this-little-light-of-mine-release-3?crumbs=hymns-for-home-and-church&lang=eng (btw - there's a thread about it here: ) Quote
HaggisShuu Posted February 23 Report Posted February 23 5 minutes ago, Emmanuel Goldstein said: I sat in Sacrament meeting this morning listening to the prelude music. “This little heart of mine” started plying and I almost pulled my hair out. Why is the church adding Creedal Christian nonsense songs? I now expect “he has the whole world in his hand” to make an appearance in the next group. Can we stick to our LDS hymns instead please?🤮 Trying to "bridge the gap." One thing I agree with the critics about is that we should stop trying to fit in with "mainline" christians. Afterall, these creeds are an abomination 🤷♂️ Emmanuel Goldstein 1 Quote
Emmanuel Goldstein Posted February 23 Author Report Posted February 23 5 minutes ago, HaggisShuu said: Trying to "bridge the gap." One thing I agree with the critics about is that we should stop trying to fit in with "mainline" christians. Afterall, these creeds are an abomination 🤷♂️ Bridging the gap would be fine if the creeds did not scream in our face that we are going to hell, with every fiber of their being. Yeah, the creeds are destroying the teachings of peace that Jesus taught. Quote
CV75 Posted February 23 Report Posted February 23 1 hour ago, Emmanuel Goldstein said: I sat in Sacrament meeting this morning listening to the prelude music. “This little heart of mine” started plying and I almost pulled my hair out. Why is the church adding Creedal Christian nonsense songs? I now expect “he has the whole world in his hand” to make an appearance in the next group. Can we stick to our LDS hymns instead please?🤮 How is the song Creedal Christian nonsense? It says it is (originally) a 19th century African American spiritual -- I say "originally" because it was popularized later: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/This_Little_Light_of_Mine I see themes of the city on a hill (Matthew 5:14-16) and the light of Christ. I also see the Church expanding her cultural relevance, and this does not require compromising the Articles of Faith (for example). Talks by Elders Bednar and Kearon come to mind on this subject of cultural norms and a universal gospel. NeuroTypical 1 Quote
NeuroTypical Posted February 23 Report Posted February 23 I admit, seeing the song show up on our list of approved hymns, with a vocal arrangement sung by the primary kiddos, surprised the heck out of me. I've been trying to put into words why, but I've failed so far. So yeah, @Emmanuel Goldstein and @HaggisShuu - can you put into words why the negative reaction? Do you see the hymn as injecting our worship or theology or belief with abominable creeds that destroy the teachings of peace? Or am I reading into what you wrote? Please - do what I'm failing to do - put into words why the discomfort. If you do think it's infecting our church with creedal nonsense, could you point to where? This little light of mine, I'm gonna let it shine. This little light of mine, I'm gonna let it shine. This little light of mine, I'm gonna let it shine. Let it shine, let it shine, let it shine! Everywhere I go, I'm gonna let it shine. Everywhere I go, I'm gonna let it shine. Everywhere I go, I'm gonna let it shine. Let it shine, let it shine, let it shine! Jesus gave it to me, I'm gonna let it shine. Jesus gave it to me, I'm gonna let it shine. Jesus gave it to me, I'm gonna let it shine. Let it shine, let it shine, let it shine! The more I think about it, the less I can explain my discomfort. MrShorty 1 Quote
HaggisShuu Posted February 23 Report Posted February 23 36 minutes ago, NeuroTypical said: I admit, seeing the song show up on our list of approved hymns, with a vocal arrangement sung by the primary kiddos, surprised the heck out of me. I've been trying to put into words why, but I've failed so far. So yeah, @Emmanuel Goldstein and @HaggisShuu - can you put into words why the negative reaction? Do you see the hymn as injecting our worship or theology or belief with abominable creeds that destroy the teachings of peace? Or am I reading into what you wrote? Please - do what I'm failing to do - put into words why the discomfort. If you do think it's infecting our church with creedal nonsense, could you point to where? This little light of mine, I'm gonna let it shine. This little light of mine, I'm gonna let it shine. This little light of mine, I'm gonna let it shine. Let it shine, let it shine, let it shine! Everywhere I go, I'm gonna let it shine. Everywhere I go, I'm gonna let it shine. Everywhere I go, I'm gonna let it shine. Let it shine, let it shine, let it shine! Jesus gave it to me, I'm gonna let it shine. Jesus gave it to me, I'm gonna let it shine. Jesus gave it to me, I'm gonna let it shine. Let it shine, let it shine, let it shine! The more I think about it, the less I can explain my discomfort. I sang it in an Anglican sponsored school. Personally I don't mind it, but it's like some who opposed clapping in the previous thread. It's a simple, uplifting message, but to include it in our hymnbook just feels like pandering to protestants. Who for the most part are actively trying to destroy our faith and would happily see us burn for eternity for demon worship. Most converts to the church come from an already christian background, so I think this is just another attempt at going "Hey, we're basically just like you!" Why pander to these people and debase ourselves when we possess to the fullness of the gospel and proper priesthood authority? The Israelites were punished for trying to become like their neighbours, why are we not being held to the same standard? Maybe my reaction is a bit extreme here, after all I do like this hymn, just not in an LDS hymnbook. NeuroTypical and JohnsonJones 2 Quote
zil2 Posted February 23 Report Posted February 23 (edited) The Children's Songbook has a song about popcorn popping on an apricot tree. At the end of my post are the lyrics (which I'll note here are copyright IRI - that is, the Church owns the song). There is absolutely nothing in this song that is remotely1 related to Christ, the gospel, the Church, religion, etc. And yet, there it is (and many others like it in said songbook - aptly named, since it's clearly not a hymnbook). Now, I'll note here that the new book is called Hymns—For Home and Church. Here's a quote from the intro: Quote These selections will include both hymns and children’s songs, all of which can be used at home, in sacrament meeting, and in other Church meetings. Now, English being what it is, I'm not sure whether they're really saying that [each and every song is appropriate for all three uses] (I disagree, but I'm nobody) or whether they're saying that [there are some songs available for each of the three uses] (I agree). It sounds more like the first, but I can't be certain. Regardless, there's folks who choose which of numerous hymns to sing and I'll bet there are many that any given ward has never sung in its entire history. With luck, those folks who do the selecting allow themselves to be guided by the Spirit in their selections for sacrament meetings. Regardless, I think one should take these things into account when pondering the new songs. Perhaps wait to get upset until you actually see the hymn number up on the [whatever that thing on the wall is called where they put the hymn numbers]. (After a search, it's called a "hymn board".) Popcorn is not popping on your apricot tree, but your (grand)children will likely love the idea, so let them sing this: Quote I looked out the window, and what did I see? Popcorn popping on the apricot tree! Spring had brought me such a nice surprise, Blossoms popping right before my eyes. I could take an armful and make a treat, A popcorn ball that would smell so sweet. It wasn’t really so, but it seemed to be Popcorn popping on the apricot tree. 1Unless you wish to point out Christ is the creator and without Him there would be neither popcorn nor apricot trees, nor anything else in this song, nevermind the person who wrote it or organization that owns it.... But I think you know what I meant. For the record, I'd be perfectly happy if they'd stopped at #1001 "Come, Thou Fount of Every Blessing", but whatever. (I am slightly upset that they appear to have started their hymns with #1001 rather than #1000 - I mean, that's just backwards. All lists should start with item 0, not item 1. (I get that the first three characters are just to distinguish the new hymns from the old, so I'm ignoring those and focusing on the relevant digit.) Still, it's not too late to redeem themselves and give us hymn #1000 - though it is too late to do the right thing and put "Come, Thou Fount of Every Blessing" in it's appropriate first (aka zeroth) position.) Edited February 23 by zil2 HaggisShuu, NeuroTypical and Just_A_Guy 3 Quote
laronius Posted February 23 Report Posted February 23 Sounds like a nice, simplistic children's song, good for primary. But not sacrament meetingesque for my tastes. Maybe it would engage children more in sacrament meeting, which I am all for if that is the intent. NeuroTypical, zil2 and Just_A_Guy 3 Quote
HaggisShuu Posted February 23 Report Posted February 23 30 minutes ago, zil2 said: Perhaps wait to get upset until you actually see the hymn number up Reasonable proposal. I only found out five minutes ago that the children's song book and hymn boom are being combined into 1 book when this new hymn book is eventually released. On an optimistic note, if all I have to get ruffled about in life is a song, I must have really brilliant life. NeuroTypical, LDSGator and zil2 3 Quote
The Folk Prophet Posted February 24 Report Posted February 24 17 hours ago, zil2 said: All lists should start with item 0 Really? So "The Morning Breaks" in the hymn book should have been hymn number 0? zil2 1 Quote
zil2 Posted February 24 Report Posted February 24 1 hour ago, The Folk Prophet said: Really? So "The Morning Breaks" in the hymn book should have been hymn number 0? Yes! Quote
Carborendum Posted February 24 Report Posted February 24 19 hours ago, zil2 said: For the record, I'd be perfectly happy if they'd stopped at #1001 "Come, Thou Fount of Every Blessing", but whatever. (I am slightly upset that they appear to have started their hymns with #1001 rather than #1000 - I mean, that's just backwards. All lists should start with item 0, not item 1. So, if @zil2 had a T-shirt that said "I'm #0", and @The Folk Prophet had a T-shirt that said "I'm #1" which would be better? Quote
zil2 Posted February 24 Report Posted February 24 9 minutes ago, Carborendum said: So, if @zil2 had a T-shirt that said "I'm #0", and @The Folk Prophet had a T-shirt that said "I'm #1" which would be better? Said shirts would clearly mean that I'm first and TFP is second. Whether being first or second is better really depends on at what? Carborendum 1 Quote
DurangoUT01 Posted February 25 Report Posted February 25 On 2/23/2025 at 9:11 AM, Emmanuel Goldstein said: I sat in Sacrament meeting this morning listening to the prelude music. “This little heart of mine” started plying and I almost pulled my hair out. Why is the church adding Creedal Christian nonsense songs? I now expect “he has the whole world in his hand” to make an appearance in the next group. Can we stick to our LDS hymns instead please?🤮 Because we’re trying so hard to “be like them” that we’re losing our own identity. It’s sad really. Quote
SilentOne Posted February 25 Report Posted February 25 1. We have always, starting with the first hymnbook and in every one since then, used songs written by other Christians. 2. "To people everywhere we simply say, 'You bring with you all the good that you have and let us add to it. That is the principle on which we work.'" - Gordon B. Hinckley 3. Are we supposed to reject Biblical truth and injunctions just because other Christians also recognize them? JohnsonJones, mordorbund, NeuroTypical and 2 others 5 Quote
mordorbund Posted February 25 Report Posted February 25 In the tradition of Onward Christian Soldiers, and We Are All Enlisted, I’m looking forward to the addition of the USMC Hymn. JohnsonJones, NeuroTypical, Carborendum and 1 other 1 1 1 1 Quote
Carborendum Posted February 25 Report Posted February 25 3 hours ago, SilentOne said: 3. Are we supposed to reject Biblical truth and injunctions just because other Christians also recognize them? If you recall a while back, a convert join the forum who fully expected us to believe their old ways. Even as we tried to inform her of the doctrine of the fall, she refused to accept the correction. Quote
Traveler Posted March 1 Report Posted March 1 Some thought about music, hymns and the standard of sacred music. First. For my friend @zil2 – As you are a literary expert (which I am not) I recognize your superior knowledge of literature. However, math and number theory is a specific kind of literature that is based on logic and void of ambiguity. Beginning a list (set of counting numbers) with zero is a gross grammatical misuse of the mathematical language. Much worse than dangling participles in English. Second. Music is a form of worship and can be a type of prayer. I am old enough to remember when hymns were sung in the temple. However, those temple hymns were sung specifically under conditions such that I would have difficulty considering sacred or part of the hymns and music of the restoration. Just as many ancient scripture texts have become corrupted so has a lot of music. I believe that Celestial music will differ from Terrestrial music that will differ from Telestial music. I suspect that the music of outer darkness will be very different that all other. Third. Standard worldwide hymns can be problematic. One example is Chinese that uses tonal variances to change the meaning of a word. The word “ma” can be spoken in Chinese 12 different tonal ways that drastically change the meaning. Singing a hymn in Chinese is a problem because following the melody (as well as parts) will change the meaning of what is being sung. My first experience listening to church members trying to sing hymns in Tiawan left me thinking that the entire congregation was tone death. Some things just do not translate well. Throughout my life I have had to relearn many things. Some things I thought highly of (like the Big Bang Theory) have turned out to be quite out of sorts with the bits and pieces of the pure light of truth to which I have been exposed to over time. In many ways I loved the “church” I grew up with in my youth. I have attempted to keep up with all the changes but in all honesty sometimes I think standards have been lowered in order to be more inclusive. The Traveler Quote
zil2 Posted March 1 Report Posted March 1 2 hours ago, Traveler said: Beginning a list (set of counting numbers) with zero is a gross grammatical misuse of the mathematical language. Complain to 90%+ of the programming languages in the world. The first item in an array is numbered 0, the second item in an array is numbered 1, etc. Not my fault. No idea whose fault it is. But every programmer knows, lists are numbered beginning with 0, not with 1. Quote
mordorbund Posted March 1 Report Posted March 1 24 minutes ago, zil2 said: No idea whose fault it is Mathematicians zil2 1 Quote
Traveler Posted March 4 Report Posted March 4 On 3/1/2025 at 1:50 PM, zil2 said: Complain to 90%+ of the programming languages in the world. The first item in an array is numbered 0, the second item in an array is numbered 1, etc. Not my fault. No idea whose fault it is. But every programmer knows, lists are numbered beginning with 0, not with 1. Look at what you just said, “The first item” not “the zero item”. The second problem is that you are confusing a list with the concept of index or offset. But do not feel bad – a great deal of programmers make this same mistake of confusing an array by counting the offsets in the array rather than the array items themselves. Anyone that has mastered a first, second or third generation language will understand this programming flaw quite well. In mathematical terms – the “mathematical identity of addition” is zero. In essence it means the number added to any other number will result in the same number to which it is added. Why is this important in programming? Because if you are at the fifth item (your index is pointing to the fifth item of the array) in an array, what must you add to where you are in an array to get to whatever item you want next. If you still want the fifth item, you will use an offset of zero to your current index. If you use 5 as the offset to your index, you will end up at the tenth item. @mordorbund The problem is not really with mathematicians but rather those with limited understanding, thinking that they have a solution (which is incorrect or incorrectly applied) to the problem. The Traveler zil2 1 Quote
zil2 Posted March 4 Report Posted March 4 9 minutes ago, Traveler said: Look at what you just said, “The first item” not “the zero item”. Precisely. And perfectly correct. The index is 0, the position is first. Not sure why you're so hung up on this, T. Whatever you do, don't become a programmer! (T, you are seriously ruining my fun here. I'm trying to play with non-programmer minds and get them all confused about 0s and 1s and firsts and seconds and indexes and positions and you're trying to make sense. Stop it! ) Traveler and Carborendum 1 1 Quote
Carborendum Posted March 4 Report Posted March 4 8 minutes ago, Traveler said: Look at what you just said, “The first item” not “the zero item”. The first item is also the zero item when talking about place holders. 0 through 9 are the single digit numbers. 10 through 99 are the two digit numbers. Look at the 10 for a minute. It is the FIRST two digit number. But the second digit of that number is "0". So, the first is also the zero. when looking at the single digit numbers, we have to include the zero, do we not? And there are 10 numerical values we can put in every decimal column. Which is the first value used in the first of all the values of the same number of digits? It depends. With single digit numbers, "0" is first. But zero on its own is not a valuable counter. It is more like we're saying that "we haven't started counting yet. But it is still the first value for any column. Even binary requires 0 as a value. Thus it must be included as a number. And it is the first that fills the column. In fact, one could argue that implied zeroes are always present. It could be argued that we don't start 2 digit numbers with a 1. We start with zero. 0, 1, 2, 3... could correctly (though not traditionally) begin with a zero in the second, third, fourth,... columns. 01, 02, 03, 04... 010, 011, 012, 013, 014 ... zil2 1 Quote
The Folk Prophet Posted March 4 Report Posted March 4 I've been asked to play guitar to accompany our ward choir singing This Little Light of Mine on Easter Sunday. My my, how times have changed. JohnsonJones, NeuroTypical and zil2 2 1 Quote
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.