The General Conference Talk Re-writers, lol

For Discussion of the Spiritual/Religious side of the Secret Combination. i.e. New Age Movement, Occult, New Spirituality, The Shift, The Secret, The Law of Attraction.
JohnnyL
captain of 1,000
Posts: 4708
Joined: Tue May 10, 2011 5:10 pm

The General Conference Talk Re-writers, lol

Postby JohnnyL » Sat Aug 05, 2017 12:28 pm

I've been listening to a lot of GC talks recently, and noticed a whole lot of rewording. Sometimes they do a great job, and other times they change the meanings and tones of the speakers. I wonder if they speakers get notified and get to choose whether to make the change or not.

Here was just one example from "The Beauty of Holiness" by Carol F. McConkie ( https://www.lds.org/general-conference/ ... s?lang=eng ):
"Sisters, if we would be holy, we must learn to sit at the feet of the Holy One of Israel and give time to holiness. Do we set aside the phone, the never-ending to-do list, and the cares of worldliness? Prayer, study, and heeding the word of God invite His cleansing and healing love into our souls. Let us take [original: TAKE...] time to be holy, that we may be filled with His sacred and sanctifying Spirit. With the Holy Ghost as our guide, we will be prepared to receive the Savior in the beauty of holiness."

I guess "they" (and I have no idea who "they" is) don't want direct commands in the talks, lol. I wonder if that affects a lot of speeches?
Last edited by JohnnyL on Tue Aug 08, 2017 9:02 am, edited 1 time in total.

Sponsored Links

Advertisements

Medical Cost Sharing - It's not insurance it's better!

ParticleMan
captain of 50
Posts: 67
Joined: Wed Mar 16, 2016 1:30 am

Re: The Genearl Conference Talk Re-writers, lol

Postby ParticleMan » Tue Aug 08, 2017 6:20 am

This thread doesn't relate to secret combinations.
The Monday following every General Conference, each speaker has the opportunity to make any edits necessary to clarify differences between what was written and what was delivered or to clarify the speaker's intent." (https://www.ksl.com/index.php?sid=12749665&nid=148)
As a professor, a former Managing Editor of Liahona Magazine corroborated that speakers have the opportunity to edit their talks prior to publication.

Whether there is a policy regarding who can issue "direct commands," I haven't heard, although it would stand to reason that only the president or perhaps another apostle should.

(Compared to the instance in the OP, there have been far more curious edits, not to mention controversial, including of video.)

User avatar
gkearney
captain of 1,000
Posts: 2330
Joined: Sat Dec 11, 2010 10:31 pm

Re: The Genearl Conference Talk Re-writers, lol

Postby gkearney » Tue Aug 08, 2017 7:09 am

This of course bring up the next question. Which version of the talk should be considered to be authoritative, the talk as give or the talk as printed?

JohnnyL
captain of 1,000
Posts: 4708
Joined: Tue May 10, 2011 5:10 pm

Re: The General Conference Talk Re-writers, lol

Postby JohnnyL » Tue Aug 08, 2017 9:11 am

gkearney wrote:
Tue Aug 08, 2017 7:09 am
This of course bring up the next question. Which version of the talk should be considered to be authoritative, the talk as give or the talk as printed?
Referring to the most well-known and biggest edit, it would definitely be the printed talk.

Many of the edits are done for correcting/ upgrading the grammar, sometimes for clarification. These can be helpful. It's like the changes to the BoM.

Others (like the one I showed) take the edge out of talks, make them "more loving". Don't want anyone to hear things like the prophets preached of "being a lost and fallen people" or "children of the devil" or anything else that might offend, or bruise the strawberries. Which is funny, because I've heard some pretty offensive talks, and no one touches them.

A very few might be about doctrine.

ParticleMan
captain of 50
Posts: 67
Joined: Wed Mar 16, 2016 1:30 am

Re: The Genearl Conference Talk Re-writers, lol

Postby ParticleMan » Tue Aug 08, 2017 9:46 am

gkearney wrote:
Tue Aug 08, 2017 7:09 am
This of course bring up the next question. Which version of the talk should be considered to be authoritative, the talk as give or the talk as printed?
If by "authoritative" you mean official, then the print version. But if you mean doctrine, then not necessarily either, so consider the following (there may be divergent opinions on fine points therein):

What Is Official Mormon Doctrine?
What Is LDS Doctrine?

User avatar
Z2100
captain of 100
Posts: 531
Joined: Thu Mar 30, 2017 7:58 am

Re: The General Conference Talk Re-writers, lol

Postby Z2100 » Tue Aug 08, 2017 2:23 pm

JohnnyL wrote:
Tue Aug 08, 2017 9:11 am
gkearney wrote:
Tue Aug 08, 2017 7:09 am
This of course bring up the next question. Which version of the talk should be considered to be authoritative, the talk as give or the talk as printed?
Referring to the most well-known and biggest edit, it would definitely be the printed talk.

Many of the edits are done for correcting/ upgrading the grammar, sometimes for clarification. These can be helpful. It's like the changes to the BoM.

Others (like the one I showed) take the edge out of talks, make them "more loving". Don't want anyone to hear things like the prophets preached of "being a lost and fallen people" or "children of the devil" or anything else that might offend, or bruise the strawberries. Which is funny, because I've heard some pretty offensive talks, and no one touches them.

A very few might be about doctrine.
What are some of those offending talks? Are they from the earlier days of the church or the 70s? They had some gold nuggest back then that they don't teach such as in the "Doctrines of Salvation" when JFS talks about blacks and the curse of Cain, or what we did in the pre-mortal existence affected the very lives we live today.
We live in the 6920th year since the Fall of Man.


Return to “Spiritual/Religious Secret Combinations”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 13 guests