Elder Holland's Book of Mormon talk

[LA Ute]

I have a feeling it will be discussed here a bit.

Whatever else might be said about it, the talk is an outstanding and impassioned believer's testimony of the book's truthfulness.

[byu71]

I have a feeling it will be discussed here a bit.

Whatever else might be said about it, the talk is an oustanding and impassioned believer's testimony of the book's truthfulness.

I would call it a "passioned" believer's testimony. Maybe I don't know the definition of passioned and impassioned.


Edit: I looked up impassioned. As usual, LA knows the language better than I.

[wuapinmon]

[Portland Ute]

I wouldn't say that SU has a non-literalist, believing view of the BOM.

I'd say he has a cynical, mocking, non-believing view of the book.,

I can't imagine Holland's talk will impress him much one way or another.

The near yelling was cool, though. Not often you see any emotion in LDS meetings other than those expressed though "The Joker" style smiles or sobbing....

[LA Ute]

I would call it a "passioned" believer's testimony. Maybe I don't know the definition of passioned and impassioned.

Well, let's just agree he was passionate!

[DrumNFeather]

I enjoyed the talk. Holland has really had excellent talks the last several conferences.

[Surfah]

I enjoyed the talk. Holland has really had excellent talks the last several conferences.

I enjoyed it also.

[UtahDan]

I enjoyed the talk. Holland has really had excellent talks the last several conferences.

He is one of my favorites as well.

[scottie]

Does near yelling and passion make it more believable? If someone else believes in something, should that have any impact on what you believe?

[ewth8tr]

Does near yelling and passion make it more believable? If someone else believes in something, should that have any impact on what you believe?

YES IT DOES! SEE!

[wuapinmon]

I'd rather see some emotion and passion in GC than Quentin Cook staring, robot-eyed-at the teleprompter for 15 mins in his GA-monotone. At least Holland got our attention, and might make a few thousand people out there take serious stock of what they believe about the BofM. I can't even remember what Cook spoke about, and few will, even when it's assigned as a EQ 4th Sunday topic by my SP next year.

[Portland Ute]

Does near yelling and passion make it more believable? If someone else believes in something, should that have any impact on what you believe?

No, scottie. I don't believe I see anyone here coming even close to suggesting such a thing.

[DrumNFeather]

Does near yelling and passion make it more believable? If someone else believes in something, should that have any impact on what you believe?

I can certainly understand why his presentation might offend, but for me personally, the apostles are so mild mannered, so even tempered, that a little passion now an again is alright.

[All-American]

No, scottie. I don't believe I see anyone here coming even close to suggesting such a thing.

And almost everybody else agrees with you, too.

[HuskyFreeNorthwest]

I'd rather see some emotion and passion in GC than Gene Cook staring, robot-eyed-at the teleprompter for 15 mins in his GA-monotone. At least Holland got our attention, and might make a few thousand people out there take serious stock of what they believe about the BofM. I can't even remember what Cook spoke about, and few will, even when it's assigned as a EQ 4th Sunday topic by my SP next year.

Amen and amen. This is why I hate GC. For every talk like Holland's there are 500 like Cook's, example whoever this guy talking now is.