Why does Monson hate the phrase "all you need is love"?

[_harmony]

Yeah, I loved the $5 bill story and the found a quarter for chicken story. People say they didn't talk about the current economic crisis much during this conference but if you listened carefully you would have heard that if you pray for money, you will get it.

Actually, if you listened carefully, what you heard from that story was: work hard and then take care of your money, and God won't have to keep it safe.

And the other thing you learn from that story is: no one searches your pockets at the laundry either.

[_DarkHelmet]

Perhaps TSM doesn't want to just "get by". And doesn't want members of the church to just "get by".

I think you are correct Harmony but I'm sure that we can work it out.

Yes we can. Even if we have to work 8 days a week.

[_jon]

I think you are correct Harmony but I'm sure that we can work it out.

Yes we can. Even if we have to work 8 days a week.

I think it will be sorted out in a few years time when I'm sixty four.

[Guest]

During a conference talk Monson was talking about what other people in the world outside of Mormonism believed. While criticizing their beliefs he said "All you need is love" in a mocking voice and then rolled his eyes which generated laughter from the congregation.

I agree that the statement is overly simplistic, but I didn't know it was something that only the secular world believed and Mormons scoffed at. It seems harmless enough. Is it not okay for Mormons to listen to the Beatles? If Jesus had taught all you need is love in a single verse in the scriptures, nobody would think twice about it. It is fairly consistent with his other teachings. The New Testament teaches that the 2 great laws are Love God and Love your neighbor. The Book of Mormon says charity is the true love of Christ. There are a ton of lessons on loving one another in the scriptures and lessons of Christianity and Mormonism so what's wrong with saying all you need is love? Sure, there are other things as well, but it's a good place to start.

My theory is Monson is still fighting those damn hippies and that phrase was hijacked by them so he has an aversion to it.

The problem is just that the Beatles's lyrics were really little more than a mindless platitude, one among countless of the mindless but, unfortunately, deeply influential platitudes that came to define the sixties and early seventies and the general attitude of mindlessness that began consuming the culture in that era.

[_Droopy]

All you need is love actually goes along very well with the teachings of Jesus.

Which assumes that this mindless platitude, as expressed in the Beatles' song, has anything in particular to do with Jesus' teachings. Good luck showing this to be the case.

Jesus taught that people should take no thought of tomorrow. God takes care of the birds and will take care of you too.

Which means what, exactly?

I didn't listen to the talk, but I don't see where there is a conflict between the two teachings.

The Beatles' use of this phrase is indicative of a teaching? And what would that be?

Is it simplistic? Sure. But it embodies something deep and wonderful and inspiring.

What?

If we all had love one towards another would their be hunger? Murder? War? Rape? Stealing?

No, but looking at the lyrics of the song themselves, I'm not sure where your seeing such implications in the Beatles' lyrics, which appear to be little more than a kind of nonsensical self esteem booster. Innocent, sure, but a long, long way from profound.

Why does Monson hate the saying?

CFR.

It doesn't inspire fear. That's all I can think of. It doesn't inspire strict obedience to the patriarchy.

Nor, hopefully, the existence of the above named nemesis within feminism's self referential creation mythology.

[_Buffalo]

The problem is just that the Beatles's lyrics here a really little more than a mindless platitude, one among countless of the mindless but, unfortunately, deeply influential platitudes that came to define the sixties and early seventies and the general attitude of mindlessness that began consuming the culture in that era.

Keep fighting those longhairs, Droopy.

[_DarkHelmet]

The problem is just that the Beatles's lyrics here a really little more than a mindless platitude, one among countless of the mindless but, unfortunately, deeply influential platitudes that came to define the sixties and early seventies and the general attitude of mindlessness that began consuming the culture in that era.

Keep fighting those longhairs, Droopy.

There are only 2 Beatles still alive left to fight, and they have short hair now. Old Beatles songs are now considered harmless and kid friendly. Little girls and their moms watch contestants sing those songs on American Idol. I'm not sure why the old geezers are still fighting the hippies in 2011. I suppose they also have a problem with Elvis the Pelvis.

[_Some Schmo]

Good grief. C'mon people! Find something legit to complain about.

I don't know why it's offensive... I think it's something in the way he moves. But I don't think he needs to carry that weight. Looks like he needs help! Or maybe he yearns for yesterday.

If I met him I'd tell him, "Baby, you're a rich man. Don't play the fool on the hill. If you don't know how to avoid it, your mother should know. This is only a day in a life... the long and winding road... across the universe, so get back and roll over Beethoven, because I've got a feeling you don't need a ticket to ride. You can't do that. Just act naturally. It's only love. I don't understand why you feel like you've got to hide your love away."

And he'd probably reply, "Oh darling, I wanna hold your hand."

And I'd say, "Sorry, but you never gave me your money, and anyway, you can't buy me love." And I'd walk away in disgust thinking I should have known better.

[_Nightlion]

The problem is just that the Beatles's lyrics here a really little more than a mindless platitude, one among countless of the mindless but, unfortunately, deeply influential platitudes that came to define the sixties and early seventies and the general attitude of mindlessness that began consuming the culture in that era.

It is sad that the Church compares itself to pop culture that will always be silly, always has, always will be. But not Church, well, not until lately.

Christ said, "Come follow me, The works that I do do ye also, Take no thought for you life...but seek ye first the kingdom of God and his righteousness, If any man will do his will, he shall know of the doctrine, whether it be of God, or whether I speak of myself."

Nothing mindless about that.

The Brethren say, "keep your eye on the Prophet, the church can never lead you astray, follow your file leader, stay the steady course, all conference talks are given by the power of the Spirit, this is a grrrrrrrrreat conference."

All mindless platitudes. Quite silly knowing that nobody actually advances a scratch.

[_just me]

All you need is love actually goes along very well with the teachings of Jesus.

Which assumes that this mindless platitude, as expressed in the Beatles' song, has anything in particular to do with Jesus' teachings. Good luck showing this to be the case.

I don't desire to show you anything.

Jesus taught that people should take no thought of tomorrow. God takes care of the birds and will take care of you too.

Which means what, exactly?

You have to have the spirit to tell you.

I didn't listen to the talk, but I don't see where there is a conflict between the two teachings.

The Beatles' use of this phrase is indicative of a teaching? And what would that be?

You would have to have the spirit to understand.

Is it simplistic? Sure. But it embodies something deep and wonderful and inspiring.

What?

You would need the spirit to teach you these things.

If we all had love one towards another would their be hunger? Murder? War? Rape? Stealing?

No, but looking at the lyrics of the song themselves, I'm not sure where your seeing such implications in the Beatles' lyrics, which appear to be little more than a kind of nonsensical self esteem booster. Innocent, sure, but a long, long way from profound.

You wouldn't understand even if I explained.

Why does Monson hate the saying?

CFR.

I already said I hadn't read the talk. (I have now) I was responding to the OP. I bet it is his favorite song. *wink*

It doesn't inspire fear. That's all I can think of. It doesn't inspire strict obedience to the patriarchy.

Nor, hopefully, the existence of the above named nemesis within feminism's self referential creation mythology.

I lost my decoder ring. All I see is gibberish here.