Your home for discussing politics, the restored gospel of Jesus Christ, and the principles of liberty.
As a professor, a former Managing Editor of Liahona Magazine corroborated that speakers have the opportunity to edit their talks prior to publication.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)
Referring to the most well-known and biggest edit, it would definitely be the printed talk.
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 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.JohnnyL wrote: ↑Tue Aug 08, 2017 9:11 amReferring 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.
Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 13 guests