Elder Poelman - October 1984 Conference Talk
- Jeremy
- captain of 1,000
- Posts: 1776
- Location: Chugiak Alaska
Elder Poelman - October 1984 Conference Talk
I enjoy how Elder Poelman explains the distinction between "The Church" and "The Gospel" in this conference talk.
-
- Follow the Prophet
- Posts: 8801
Re: Elder Poelman - October 1984 Conference Talk
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ggf4UFP8kOU" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
Here is the version that the church had him re-do, and this is the version that is on the Church website.
There are very interesting omissions and additions.
Here is the version that the church had him re-do, and this is the version that is on the Church website.
There are very interesting omissions and additions.
-
- Level 34 Illuminated
- Posts: 8520
Re: Elder Poelman - October 1984 Conference Talk
I've found it extremely interesting that is was actually in the year 1984 that the Church tried to send Elder Poelman's original talk down the memory hole.
You can't make that sort of stuff up.
You can't make that sort of stuff up.
- rewcox
- Level 34 Illuminated
- Posts: 5873
-
- Level 34 Illuminated
- Posts: 8520
Re: Elder Poelman - October 1984 Conference Talk
The original talk is excellent -- full of truth. Have you listened to it, or read it, rewcox?
- Jeremy
- captain of 1,000
- Posts: 1776
- Location: Chugiak Alaska
Re: Elder Poelman - October 1984 Conference Talk
Jeremy wrote:I enjoy how Elder Poelman explains the distinction between "The Church" and "The Gospel" in this conference talk.
Perhaps you missed the OP. This formatting may help:rewcox wrote:So get to the point. What do you want to say?
I enjoy how Elder Poelman explains the distinction between "The Church" and "The Gospel" in this conference talk.
- captainfearnot
- captain of 1,000
- Posts: 1966
Re: Elder Poelman - October 1984 Conference Talk
The differences between the two versions are highlighted here, if anyone is interested.
My favorite part of this whole episode is the cough track. I didn't know such a thing existed before.
My favorite part of this whole episode is the cough track. I didn't know such a thing existed before.
- Jeremy
- captain of 1,000
- Posts: 1776
- Location: Chugiak Alaska
Re: Elder Poelman - October 1984 Conference Talk
Thanks for the link. I once transcribed the talk myself so that I could identify the changes. Unfortunately I found the transcript in the link above to not be entirely accurate.captainfearnot wrote:The differences between the two versions are highlighted here, if anyone is interested.
- captainfearnot
- captain of 1,000
- Posts: 1966
Re: Elder Poelman - October 1984 Conference Talk
Wow, that's good to know. I must admit I've never sat and listened to either version of the talk while reading through the transcript to see how accurate it is.
- Robin Hood
- Level 34 Illuminated
- Posts: 13112
- Location: England
Re: Elder Poelman - October 1984 Conference Talk
Not this again!
This has been done to death..... repeatedly.
This has been done to death..... repeatedly.
- rewcox
- Level 34 Illuminated
- Posts: 5873
Re: Elder Poelman - October 1984 Conference Talk
What's wrong with you folks?
Why do you go about trying to destroy the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-Day Saints?
Let's try polygamy. Proved that God authorized it.
Well, how about kneeling during the sacrament. Showed that is distracting. Selfish people want to do it anyway.
You are spiritually sick. You claim to be born again, but you're not. You're sick. All you can do is bring up one negative thing after another. If you dislike it so much, why don't you leave.
If you have anything good, talk about it. But you can't, because you don't have anything good.
Why do you go about trying to destroy the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-Day Saints?
Let's try polygamy. Proved that God authorized it.
Well, how about kneeling during the sacrament. Showed that is distracting. Selfish people want to do it anyway.
You are spiritually sick. You claim to be born again, but you're not. You're sick. All you can do is bring up one negative thing after another. If you dislike it so much, why don't you leave.
If you have anything good, talk about it. But you can't, because you don't have anything good.
- Jeremy
- captain of 1,000
- Posts: 1776
- Location: Chugiak Alaska
Re: Elder Poelman - October 1984 Conference Talk
Help us out Robin Hood. Links please.Robin Hood wrote:This has been done to death..... repeatedly.
- Jeremy
- captain of 1,000
- Posts: 1776
- Location: Chugiak Alaska
Re: Elder Poelman - October 1984 Conference Talk
Apparently I am spiritually sick.rewcox wrote:What's wrong with you folks?
Destroy it? I presented a talk by one who has/had a special calling to make useful observations and present them to those who do and do not have special callings. I personally found the presented material to be of value and beneficial. Is there something about Elder Poelman's talk that you find offensive rew?rewcox wrote:Why do you go about trying to destroy the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-Day Saints?
Again, I shared something I like. I don't find it to be negative. The principle presented by Poelman is valid and true.rewcox wrote:You are spiritually sick. You claim to be born again, but you're not. You're sick. All you can do is bring up one negative thing after another. If you dislike it so much, why don't you leave.
I thought this was good. Its ELDER Poelman giving a conference talk. What is the problem with that? You drop quotes all the time with huge obnoxious text (which seems fine to do), yet I post a video (essentially quoting the whole talk) and this is the reception?rewcox wrote:If you have anything good, talk about it. But you can't, because you don't have anything good.
I would say "unbelievable", however individuals responding to an attack where no attack was made is a pattern that has been done to death..... repeatedly.
- rewcox
- Level 34 Illuminated
- Posts: 5873
Re: Elder Poelman - October 1984 Conference Talk
Yes, what do you do when you are disaffected? A continuous barrage of negative stuff on the church or leaders. Why didn't you just post the original one you like?
Even smart people can be sick if they focus on the wrong things.
Even smart people can be sick if they focus on the wrong things.
Jeremy wrote:Apparently I am spiritually sick.rewcox wrote:What's wrong with you folks?Destroy it? I presented a talk by one who has/had a special calling to make useful observations and present them to those who do and do not have special callings. I personally found the presented material to be of value and beneficial. Is there something about Elder Poelman's talk that you find offensive rew?rewcox wrote:Why do you go about trying to destroy the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-Day Saints?Again, I shared something I like. I don't find it to be negative. The principle presented by Poelman is valid and true.rewcox wrote:You are spiritually sick. You claim to be born again, but you're not. You're sick. All you can do is bring up one negative thing after another. If you dislike it so much, why don't you leave.I thought this was good. Its ELDER Poelman giving a conference talk. What is the problem with that? You drop quotes all the time with huge obnoxious text (which seems fine to do), yet I post a video (essentially quoting the whole talk) and this is the reception?rewcox wrote:If you have anything good, talk about it. But you can't, because you don't have anything good.
I would say "unbelievable", however individuals responding to an attack where no attack was made is a pattern that has been done to death..... repeatedly.
- Jeremy
- captain of 1,000
- Posts: 1776
- Location: Chugiak Alaska
Re: Elder Poelman - October 1984 Conference Talk
I thought I did.rewcox wrote:Why didn't you just post the original one you like?
Maybe if I make the text smaller you will read it.
:ymhug: This is not an attack. While the "hug" is a bit exaggerated, it is used in replacement of a hand shake.
So, back to focusing on good things. Rew, what do you think of the talk? Its good - right?
- rewcox
- Level 34 Illuminated
- Posts: 5873
Re: Elder Poelman - October 1984 Conference Talk
This thread is damaged, your friends Stahura and Lizzy60 jumped on it and you thanked them. We know how you work.
Jeremy wrote:I thought I did.rewcox wrote:Why didn't you just post the original one you like?
Maybe if I make the text smaller you will read it.
:ymhug: This is not an attack. While the "hug" is a bit exaggerated, it is used in replacement of a hand shake.
So, back to focusing on good things. Rew, what do you think of the talk? Its good - right?
-
- Follow the Prophet
- Posts: 8801
Re: Elder Poelman - October 1984 Conference Talk
All i did was post the "official version of the church", I figured you'd appreciate that.rewcox wrote:This thread is damaged, your friends Stahura and Lizzy60 jumped on it and you thanked them. We know how you work.
Jeremy wrote:I thought I did.rewcox wrote:Why didn't you just post the original one you like?
Maybe if I make the text smaller you will read it.
:ymhug: This is not an attack. While the "hug" is a bit exaggerated, it is used in replacement of a hand shake.
So, back to focusing on good things. Rew, what do you think of the talk? Its good - right?
- Jeremy
- captain of 1,000
- Posts: 1776
- Location: Chugiak Alaska
Re: Elder Poelman - October 1984 Conference Talk
I am curious if one where to read this thread from the beginning if they would find the same thing I did. At a very specific point this thread became damaged and by my observation it was neither Stahura or Lizzy60. Some will say that it was damaged from the start... these individuals are presuming an attack and taking a position of defense right out the gate. Unfortunately, this leads to damaged threads that could otherwise be informative. Too often when we approach positions with an attitude of accusing, we are doing the work that reinforces the cause we claim to be in opposition of. It is destructive to accuse... case in point, the dialogue of this thread.rewcox wrote:This thread is damaged, your friends Stahura and Lizzy60 jumped on it and you thanked them. We know how you work.
That said, there is useful content. Thank you Stahura, captainfearnot and Lizzy60. Useful and/or interesting things to consider.
Rew and Robin, I am confident you are capable of offering something useful to this thread if you choose.
- rewcox
- Level 34 Illuminated
- Posts: 5873
Re: Elder Poelman - October 1984 Conference Talk
Right, sophistry.Jeremy wrote:I am curious if one where to read this thread from the beginning if they would find the same thing I did. At a very specific point this thread became damaged and by my observation it was neither Stahura or Lizzy60. Some will say that it was damaged from the start... these individuals are presuming an attack and taking a position of defense right out the gate. Unfortunately, this leads to damaged threads that could otherwise be informative. Too often when we approach positions with an attitude of accusing, we are doing the work that reinforces the cause we claim to be in opposition of. It is destructive to accuse... case in point, the dialogue of this thread.rewcox wrote:This thread is damaged, your friends Stahura and Lizzy60 jumped on it and you thanked them. We know how you work.
That said, there is useful content. Thank you Stahura, captainfearnot and Lizzy60. Useful and/or interesting things to consider.
Rew and Robin, I am confident you are capable of offering something useful to this thread if you choose.
-
- captain of 100
- Posts: 102
Re: Elder Poelman - October 1984 Conference Talk
Please don't fight against the church.
Not all truth is useful.
Not all truth is useful.
-
- captain of 100
- Posts: 263
Re: Elder Poelman - October 1984 Conference Talk
I've been reading it from the beginning and to tell the truth I'm actually very very confused over what is being discussed here. I suppose I lack the background information on this.Jeremy wrote:I am curious if one where to read this thread from the beginning if they would find the same thing I did. At a very specific point this thread became damaged and by my observation it was neither Stahura or Lizzy60. Some will say that it was damaged from the start... these individuals are presuming an attack and taking a position of defense right out the gate. Unfortunately, this leads to damaged threads that could otherwise be informative. Too often when we approach positions with an attitude of accusing, we are doing the work that reinforces the cause we claim to be in opposition of. It is destructive to accuse... case in point, the dialogue of this thread.rewcox wrote:This thread is damaged, your friends Stahura and Lizzy60 jumped on it and you thanked them. We know how you work.
That said, there is useful content. Thank you Stahura, captainfearnot and Lizzy60. Useful and/or interesting things to consider.
Rew and Robin, I am confident you are capable of offering something useful to this thread if you choose.
I gather he gave a talk and it was edited a little between when he gave it and the publication. I suppose he deviated from what he wrote on his notes and such, which I don't think would be unusual if one is trying to talk instead of read it.
Other than that I'm kind of confused on what the discussion is over.
- rewcox
- Level 34 Illuminated
- Posts: 5873
Re: Elder Poelman - October 1984 Conference Talk
Maybe the group will tell you what the point is.Dash jones wrote:I've been reading it from the beginning and to tell the truth I'm actually very very confused over what is being discussed here. I suppose I lack the background information on this.Jeremy wrote:I am curious if one where to read this thread from the beginning if they would find the same thing I did. At a very specific point this thread became damaged and by my observation it was neither Stahura or Lizzy60. Some will say that it was damaged from the start... these individuals are presuming an attack and taking a position of defense right out the gate. Unfortunately, this leads to damaged threads that could otherwise be informative. Too often when we approach positions with an attitude of accusing, we are doing the work that reinforces the cause we claim to be in opposition of. It is destructive to accuse... case in point, the dialogue of this thread.rewcox wrote:This thread is damaged, your friends Stahura and Lizzy60 jumped on it and you thanked them. We know how you work.
That said, there is useful content. Thank you Stahura, captainfearnot and Lizzy60. Useful and/or interesting things to consider.
Rew and Robin, I am confident you are capable of offering something useful to this thread if you choose.
I gather he gave a talk and it was edited a little between when he gave it and the publication. I suppose he deviated from what he wrote on his notes and such, which I don't think would be unusual if one is trying to talk instead of read it.
Other than that I'm kind of confused on what the discussion is over.
-
- Follow the Prophet
- Posts: 8801
Re: Elder Poelman - October 1984 Conference Talk
Dash jones wrote:I've been reading it from the beginning and to tell the truth I'm actually very very confused over what is being discussed here. I suppose I lack the background information on this.Jeremy wrote:I am curious if one where to read this thread from the beginning if they would find the same thing I did. At a very specific point this thread became damaged and by my observation it was neither Stahura or Lizzy60. Some will say that it was damaged from the start... these individuals are presuming an attack and taking a position of defense right out the gate. Unfortunately, this leads to damaged threads that could otherwise be informative. Too often when we approach positions with an attitude of accusing, we are doing the work that reinforces the cause we claim to be in opposition of. It is destructive to accuse... case in point, the dialogue of this thread.rewcox wrote:This thread is damaged, your friends Stahura and Lizzy60 jumped on it and you thanked them. We know how you work.
That said, there is useful content. Thank you Stahura, captainfearnot and Lizzy60. Useful and/or interesting things to consider.
Rew and Robin, I am confident you are capable of offering something useful to this thread if you choose.
I gather he gave a talk and it was edited a little between when he gave it and the publication. I suppose he deviated from what he wrote on his notes and such, which I don't think would be unusual if one is trying to talk instead of read it.
Other than that I'm kind of confused on what the discussion is over.
What happened was he gave a talk in General Conference. This talk distinguishes very clearly the difference between the church and the Gospel.
Afterwards, the church had him go back to the podium and re-give a talk to an empty conference center, and they revised his talk and had him read the revised talk.
The revised talk is much more pro-leader pro-church than the first one was.
It just makes you wonder why they would have him secretly record a different talks, with a lot of omissions and additions. There are side by side text comparisons.
Anyways..
-
- captain of 100
- Posts: 263
Re: Elder Poelman - October 1984 Conference Talk
I was under the impression that they normally proof read the talks prior to them being given?
Would it be that perhaps he was trying to talk from memory instead of reading it and got a few things changed that needed to be corrected.
Would it be that perhaps he was trying to talk from memory instead of reading it and got a few things changed that needed to be corrected.
-
- Level 34 Illuminated
- Posts: 8520
Re: Elder Poelman - October 1984 Conference Talk
I don't think there was as much oversight in 1984. His delivery of the talk doesn't sound like he is saying anything extemporaneously. It's very deliberate. Also, I believe his first talk was 100% doctrinally sound, just a bit too much "meat" for those still on a diet of milk.Dash jones wrote:I was under the impression that they normally proof read the talks prior to them being given?
Would it be that perhaps he was trying to talk from memory instead of reading it and got a few things changed that needed to be corrected.
Also, if there was false doctrine, perhaps an explanation of the cut and paste would have been in order, instead of the memory hole technique.