DiscussMormonism.com

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.

Well it's simply not true that all you need is love. You also need to experience having your body submerged in water for a second or too after certain words have been spoken, and you have to know certain secret words and phrases, and you have to know certain secret handshakes.

Duh.

Monson is out of touch. He doesn't realize that the current child-bearing generation of Mormons love the Beatles and see them as completely harmless and family friendly. Monson is still stuck in the 60s, fighting the longhairs and the hippies.

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

Jesus taught that people should take no thought of tomorrow. God takes care of the birds and will take care of you too. Love God, yourself and neighbor was taught as the highest law.

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

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

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

As a believer 'all we need is love' was one of my favorite phrases. It still is. I would have likely been disturbed by this talk as a believer.

Why does Monson hate the saying? It doesn't inspire fear. That's all I can think of. It doesn't inspire strict obedience to the patriarchy.

If we consider the LDS view of African Americans, homosexuals, women, children, people of other faiths, atheists/agnostics... basically, anyone not an LDS adult white male, we can easily imagine why this would be funny to the attendees of the GC.

Now, if the phrase were "all you need is conditional superficial love," LDS would be all over it.

just me wrote:Why does Monson hate the saying? It doesn't inspire fear. That's all I can think of. It doesn't inspire strict obedience to the patriarchy.

I agree. It goes back to the faith without works mantra of Mormonism. Love and/or faith are only good if they get you to pray, pay and obey. Neither one is as good as fear or guilt.

I agree. It goes back to the faith without works mantra of Mormonism. Love and/or faith are only good if they get you to pray, pay and obey. Neither one is as good as fear or guilt.

Actually, I think Monson was thinking more along the lines of Matthew 25:32-46.

bcspace wrote:

I agree. It goes back to the faith without works mantra of Mormonism. Love and/or faith are only good if they get you to pray, pay and obey. Neither one is as good as fear or guilt.

Actually, I think Monson was thinking more along the lines of Matthew 25:32-46.

Oh yeah. Matthew 25:32-46. I forgot about that.

but you see, unlike you, most people don't have the Bible memorized so do you mind posting the actual verses.

bcspace wrote:

I agree. It goes back to the faith without works mantra of Mormonism. Love and/or faith are only good if they get you to pray, pay and obey. Neither one is as good as fear or guilt.

Actually, I think Monson was thinking more along the lines of Matthew 25:32-46.

Like all your scripture quotations, this is totally irrelevant to the topic matter being discussed. That's why you never post the actual text cited.

I do not think that President Monson hates the Beatles, nor do I think that any Latter-day Saint interpreted his statement as condemnation of the Beatles' music or that he intended it to be interpreted that way.

Life is much more pleasant without the overt-cynicism.