Keepapitchinin, the Mormon History blog » Pres. Uchtdorf: “Is It All Right to Have Questions about the Church or Its Doctrine?”

Pres. Uchtdorf: “Is It All Right to Have Questions about the Church or Its Doctrine?”

By: Ardis E. Parshall - November 12, 2009

Last Sunday (1 November 2009), President Dieter F. Uchtdorf spoke at a CES fireside for young adults, at BYU. It hasn’t yet received much attention in the Bloggernacle, perhaps because it is so far available only in its broadcast form, not as a transcript.

Among the issues addressed by Pres. Uchtdorf is that of having questions about the Church and its doctrine (and I think it doesn’t do violence to his intentions to add “and its history”).

Now, the next issue. What about doubts and questions in principle? How do you find out that the gospel is true? Is it all right to have questions about the Church or its doctrine?

My dear young friends, we are a question-asking people. We have always been, because we know that inquiry leads to truth. That is how the Church got its start, from a young man who had questions. In fact, I’m not sure how one can discover truth without asking questions. In the scriptures you will rarely discover a revelation that didn’t come in response to a question.

Whenever a question arose and Joseph Smith wasn’t sure of the answer he approached the Lord. And the results are the wonderful revelations in the Doctrine and Covenants. Often the knowledge Joseph received extended far beyond the original question. That is because not only can the Lord answer the questions we ask, but even more importantly, He can give us answers to questions we should have asked.

Let us listen to those answers. The missionary effort of the Church is founded upon honest investigators asking heartfelt questions. Inquiry is the birth place of testimony.

Some might feel embarrassed or unworthy because they have searching questions regarding the gospel, but they needn’t feel that way. Asking questions isn’t a sign of weakness. It’s a precursor of growth.

God commands us to seek answers to our questions and asks only that we seek with a sincere heart, with real intent, having faith in Christ. When we do so, the truth of all things can be manifest to us by the power of the Holy Ghost. Fear not. Ask questions. Be curious.

But doubt not – doubt not. Always hold fast to faith and to the light you have already received. Because we see imperfectly in mortality, not everything is going to make sense right now. In fact, I should think that if everything did make sense to us, it would be evidence that it had all been made up by a mortal mind. Remember that God has said, “My thoughts are not your thoughts, neither are your ways my ways. For as the heavens are higher than the earth so are my ways higher than your ways, and my thoughts than your thoughts.”

Nevertheless, you know that one of the purposes of mortality is to become more like your Heavenly Father in your thoughts and in your ways. Viewed from this perspective, searching for answers to your questions can bring you closer to God, strengthening your testimony instead of shaking it. It’s true that faith is not a perfect knowledge, but as you exercise your faith, applying gospel principles every day under any circumstances, apply those principles wherever you are. And whenever it is, you will taste the sweet fruits of the gospel, and by this fruit you will know of its truth.




  1. For me, the two points that stand out the most are:

    Questions are not enough. It’s good to ask questions, but then we are obligated to seek for answers. Too often raising questions stops with the questions, and instead of those questions becoming a means to enlightenment, they become a litany of complaint. Asking “How could Joseph Smith teach/practice X?” is one thing if we then apply secular research and sacred study and prayer to find an answer. Asking the question without genuinely seeking an answer leaves the question hanging there as an implied condemnation of Joseph Smith.

    Asking questions is not the same as doubting, and vice versa. Even as we ask one question (“How could Joseph Smith teach/practice X?”), we need to hang on to the light we have already received (say, a testimony of the Book of Mormon or a conviction of the reality of the First Vision).

    Comment by Ardis E. Parshall — November 12, 2009 @ 8:33 am

  2. This is great. I gave a talk and bore my testimony along these lines recently. Good to hear Elder Uchtdorf backing me up.

    Comment by Nitsav — November 12, 2009 @ 9:11 am

  3. Part of me really resonates, but another part of me wants to ask the follow-up “But what about when my answers are out of line, or when there are no answers?”

    Comment by Matt W. — November 12, 2009 @ 9:22 am

  4. I love this talk—I listened to it three times, then insisted my college aged kids watch it online. I love the part about “ask, but doubt not” telling us that we need to stretch, while holding on to the truth already in our hands. I was raised in a church that activley discouraged questioning, in even the most basic form, “because if you need to know, they’ll tell you.” That alone is what drew me to the gospel. When I pelted the missionaries with questions I had bottled up since childhood, they calmly answered me, or promised to find out and then answer me. As a parent, I love helping my kids figuring their world out. How could a loving Father in heaven do less?

    Comment by deb — November 12, 2009 @ 9:36 am

  5. As Church members we should not follow blindly as so many accuse us of doing. I, personally, like to learn. Part of this is asking questions and seeking answers, seeking truth, seeking understanding. There are many things we just don’t know. Truth that we don’t have and may well be revealed later and so forth. To make up for this lack of knowledge we speculate. I don’t believe that questions about doctrine or the church should be taboo. This is how we learn and grow. I do agree that we should recognize what our anchor is–i.e. personal testimony. We should also asked questions with the intention of understanding the truth rather then let questions lead us from our anchors. Too often “controversial” issues are swept under the rug as “inappropriate” or “not essential to our salvation.” Church history is treated the same way–e.g. it should be “faith promoting.” I believe, however, that we should be engaged in searching for truth and understanding even if this challenges some of our assumptions. The Truth will make you Free.

    Comment by Steve C. — November 12, 2009 @ 9:37 am

  6. “Extra! Extra! Pres. Uchdorf has Nitsav’s Back!” :)

    That is the natural follow-up, isn’t it, Matt? “No answer” is, I think, easier to deal with than “out-of-line answer,” at least for my temperament, because I’m very used to “not yet” being the answer for questions about why promised blessings aren’t forthcoming. “No answer” to me just means “No answer … yet” which I can deal with. Not sure what I would do with an out-of-line answer; not sure I’ve ever received one. Good question.

    Comment by Ardis E. Parshall — November 12, 2009 @ 9:40 am

  7. Wow. This really should get more attention. Great post, Ardis.

    Comment by Clean Cut — November 12, 2009 @ 9:44 am

  8. “[What about] when there are no answers?”

    Great question, Matt.

    Comment by Clean Cut — November 12, 2009 @ 9:45 am

  9. (I guess I’m not as patient as Ardis with the “no answers”–or at least no current GOOD answers–type questions.)

    Comment by Clean Cut — November 12, 2009 @ 9:48 am

  10. Love it, Ardis. Thanks.

    Comment by Steve Evans — November 12, 2009 @ 9:50 am

  11. Thank you for pointing this out, Ardis. We’ll be watching this one for big kid FHE next week.

    Comment by Jami — November 12, 2009 @ 9:53 am

  12. So, if I have a question, you have all of the answers, Ardis? Right? 😉

    Comment by Brian Duffin — November 12, 2009 @ 10:00 am

  13. Right. Uh …

    Comment by Ardis E. Parshall — November 12, 2009 @ 10:03 am

  14. I am glad that Elder Uchtdorf is encouraging people to ask questions.

    But to me, the “doubt not” is a little confusing. I am not sure if I am understanding well what he means by that. “Doubt not” what? That God exists and that He can and will answer questions? Or, “doubt not” the particular issue/doctrine/policy which is the reason why we are actually asking the question in the first place?

    I tend to interpret it as the “doubt not” God will answer your questions. And I am afraid that many members will use the “doubt not” the particular issue/doctrine/policy for which we are asking the question, thus pretty much taking over the actual inquiring process and answering themselves “Ah! I should doubt not, so all is well…”

    I share this because recently, I have asked questions of both types. Personal ones in which I have to trust and be faithful that God will answer. And then there are those questions about doctrines, policies, ideologies that have been spread/promoted/encouraged by the leaders of the church either recently or long ago (some recently that seem to reflect ideologies of long ago), because let’s face it; some of them, I doubt very much had a divine or inspired origin.

    I think I have gotten many answers, and some of them are very much in tune with my doubting. Some things that should have never happened, or that never really had a divine or inspired origin, have been confirmed as such to me. Yet I see so many go with “Ah! I should never doubt, so that must have been inspired since all is well…”

    Anyhow, thanks for sharing this so quickly.

    Comment by Manuel — November 12, 2009 @ 10:10 am

  15. We certainly must be “a question-asking people” – those who have the most answers have asked the most questions. But as the talk seems to point out, it seems that the most difficult part of questioning is maintaining a neutral stance – often times we become antagonistic to our more familiar beliefs rather than genuinely being open to any possible answer. I think this is what it means to have a “sincere heart” and “real intent.”

    On #1 – When I was a teenager I began to doubt by capacity to discern the truthfulness of the church’s teachings while living a thoroughly LDS life. The solution, I thought in my teenage mind, was to stop going to church for a while. The wisest counsel I received at the time was from my Young Men’s president — he effectively said, “I hope that you will come to church, but I will only be concerned about you if you stop seeking answers.” He clearly had confidence in the gospel’s truthfulness; if we know certain things to be true, we shouldn’t fear honest questioning, but rather apathy.

    Comment by Craig M. — November 12, 2009 @ 10:16 am

  16. President Uchtdorf is clearly encouraging intellectual/spiritual curiosity, not a “question the authorities and don’t trust anyone over 30” kind of thing.

    As I teach my Institute BoM class, I say something along the lines of-
    “I’m going to be pointing out elements of the BoM that seem to indicate its antiquity. I’m also going to point out elements that seem to indicate a 19th century origin. Our faith should neither be based on the first category, nor challenged by the second. Though I doubt this will happen for all of them, I’ll also point out things I originally thought fell into the second category which, upon further study, actually fell into the first.”

    I ask my questions from a perspective of (rather conservative) faith, but I am also open to having many of my understandings (particularly in secondary areas, which is most of them) shown to be shallow or incomplete, and I’m capable of living with tension, ambiguity, and unanswered questions.

    Comment by Nitsav — November 12, 2009 @ 10:57 am

  17. I’ve listened to the talk twice (and I never listen to CES firesides). What Ardis excerpted is great, but President Uchtdorf covered a lot of other material as well and, in my opinion, nailed all of it. Since he has moved beyond flying analogies, he really seems to have hit his stride as a speaker.

    Comment by Last Lemming — November 12, 2009 @ 11:40 am

  18. Thanks for bringing this to my attention, Ardis. My youngest son was supposed to attend the broadcast, but wasn’t feeling well, so he missed it. We’ll replay the broadcast together this weekend, as he really needs this (as do I!).

    Comment by kevinf — November 12, 2009 @ 11:47 am

  19. I also listened to the talk multiple times. I feel that best part was the section cited above. The pendulum in the Church has definitely swung too far in the direction of “blind obedience” to the exclusion spiritual/intellectual inquiry.

    A testimony is built upon questioning, pondering, studying, praying, and listening. It does not come by sheep-like following of cultural norms. To survive without the scaffolding of church and family, an individual MUST have a deep, abiding witness of the truth revealed to them through scripture study, prophetic counsel AND, most importantly, the Holy Ghost.

    I got the impression from the most recent conference talks that the Brethren are concerned about the mixture of culture with the Restored Gospel and are seeking to get the Saints to think for themselves.

    Comment by Michael — November 12, 2009 @ 12:53 pm

  20. This is great, Ardis. Thanks for putting it out there. Like others, I am interested in the relationship between a “question” and a “doubt” and wish this dichotomy were more clear.

    Comment by TT — November 12, 2009 @ 1:34 pm

  21. I spent the past week with dear cousins who live on the other side of the country. We were brought together by the death and memorial service for my grandfather, H. Austin Starling. We spent several nights sitting up talking and catching up on the past couple of decades since we all used to live in the same city. We talked about our experiences in the church and why some of us were active in the church and others were not. Two sisters who are not active in the church told of how when they were growing up and had questions about things they were told NOT to question. They were told that you just had to believe. They weren’t taught how to seek out the answers from the Lord. It broke my heart and made me wonder how their lives, and the lives of their posterity would be different if they had been told what Pres. Uchtdorf told the young people in this address.

    In regard to timing of answers to our questions, I LOVE this quote:
    “Petitioning in prayer has taught me, again and again, that the vault of heaven with all its blessings is to be opened only by a combination lock. One tumbler falls when there is faith; a second when there is personal righteousness; the third and final tumbler falls only when what is sought is, in God’s judgment—not ours—right for us. Sometimes we pound on the vault door for something we want very much and wonder why the door does not open. We would be very spoiled children if that vault door opened any more easily than it does. I can tell, looking back, that God truly loves me by inventorying the petitions He has refused to grant me. Our rejected petitions tell us much about ourselves but also much about our flawless Father.” Neal A. Maxwell

    Comment by julianna — November 12, 2009 @ 2:38 pm

  22. I loved his talk. I agree that the whole thing was amazing, but I, too, was particularly struck by this part of his talk.

    I see ‘doubt not’ as asking questions with a spirit of faith — in God, in His plan, in the Restoration, in prophetic teachings on these topics, etc. I have seen people ask questions in a way that feeds doubt, rather than builds faith.

    For example (imo) if someone goes to the Book of Mormon with an *intent* to prove it wrong, the chance of that yielding good fruit and strengthened faith is not the same as if you go in with the intent to ask God, with an open mind and heart, in faith, if it’s true. If we go in already deciding that we don’t believe, we make it harder for God to help us find truth.

    Alma talks of not casting the seed of faith out by unbelief. There are critical moments where we have to choose between doubt and faith.

    I sensed that he was asking us to build upon and hold onto the truths he was declaring about what the gospel teaches us about who we are, why we are here, and where we are going and not to let our questions undermine that foundation of faith. I believe faith, real intent, and a sincere heart lead to increased faith and building on that foundation, and doubt chips away at those things.

    That’s my view of that.

    Comment by m&m — November 13, 2009 @ 1:26 am

  23. “Faith in search of knowledge.”
    -Saint Anslem

    Comment by Floyd the Wonderdog — November 13, 2009 @ 5:12 am

  24. Once again, Ardis, you give me reason to love your blog.

    Comment by S. Taylor — November 13, 2009 @ 7:12 am

  25. Elder Uchtdorf’s direction is refreshing and admirable. I am left wondering about the apparent contradiction between actively questioning and not doubting. From doubts arise questions. While it is certainly possible to question without doubt, doubt is the foundation of constructive questioning.

    By implication, Elder Uchtdorf appears in a gentle way to condemn those who doubt. As we move towards clarity, truth, and accuracy in our understanding of church doctrine and history, it is unlikely that we will not pass through times of doubt. Should it then not be encouraged in our process of spiritual and intellectual maturation?

    Comment by Tyler — November 13, 2009 @ 9:00 am

  26. “Always hold fast to faith and to the light you have already received.” That’s the difference Pres. Uchtdorf is making between questioning and doubt, I think.

    Of course questions arise. The key is not to throw away everything, including confirmations you have had about some parts of the gospel, because you are questioning one other part. People do that when they abandon religion entirely because something horrible happens, “and if there were a God he wouldn’t have let it happen.” Or they have a question about Joseph Smith’s plural marriages, and instead of seeking to understand that, they conclude that he wasn’t a prophet at all, despite previous witnesses to other elements of his calling.

    I think some of us are using different definitions of words like “doubt” and “question” and “faith.” They may be valid definitions, but understanding what the speaker meant when he used them by reading those words in context is important.

    (Tyler, even though I’m bouncing off your comment, I’m not targeting your words in particular, just responding to a general sense of several comments.)

    Comment by Ardis E. Parshall — November 13, 2009 @ 10:01 am

  27. I really enjoyed that broadcast, and Ardis, I really liked your comment #1.

    I think one of the differences between doubt and questioning is that “doubt” usually involves an element of fear — fear that one has been deceived, that God isn’t there, that one’s foundation isn’t firm, etc. I think a lot of doubters cope with that fear by embracing it. I think faith is the rejection of the fear, not the rejection of the question.

    I don’t think Elder Uchtdorf was in any way condemning doubters. I think he was simply encouraging people to have faith that whatever momentary confusion they may face will eventually pass, and to seek to move forward. That’s where the growth comes from.

    Comment by Martin — November 13, 2009 @ 10:27 am

  28. Matt, #3, I blogged my thoughts on that the other day, before I heard about this apparently excellent address. from Pres. Uchtdorf:

    I see through a glass darkly, and I kinda like it.

    Comment by BHodges — November 13, 2009 @ 5:02 pm

  29. I think some of us are using different definitions of words like “doubt” and “question” and “faith.” They may be valid definitions, but understanding what the speaker meant when he used them by reading those words in context is important.

    I agree. I think that a negative connotation has been given to the word “doubt,” in the sense that it is implied that one who doubts somehow denies faith, or consciously chooses not to exercise faith. I can see the message in that context, yet I think I just disagree with this particular connotation of the word “doubt.”

    I can also understand some of the examples given that some may be looking for faults rather than being open to actual answers. Sometimes this is not the case though. Therefore, I hope those of you who presented those examples don’t simply flush people with real doubts and real questions into that narrow category.

    I have witnessed that it can actually go both ways. On the opposite way I notice that sometimes some people fail to admit fault where there is one, and forces him/herself to believe the issue must have been right somehow in some unkown context were the person to have a vision of some sort of greater picture.

    While there are many instances that this may actually apply well, there are a few (not a lot, but a few) instances where we must admit fault where there is fault, and we must face things that are a definite no no.

    When people learn to accept that answer (that some issues are actually a true and legitimate fault), a huge burden is lifted. No longer does the person have to force him/herself to believe or carry something that is plain wrong. No longer does the person need to live in ignorance. And a new level of maturity is achieved: no longer does that person need to live within the doctrinal shallowness that requires that absolutely every speck of text ever uttered or written has to somehow fit in, thus attempting to give the illusion of perfection where there isn’t perfection. True spiritual progression can now be achieved, and an opportunity to show the innermost of Christian attitudes (charity, compassion, love, understanding) is presented.

    I don’t think Elder Uchtdorf’s message went this far, but I think we are heading in the right direction.

    Comment by Manuel — November 13, 2009 @ 5:05 pm

  30. Deb, #4, unfortunately there is an undercurrent for some Church members that discourages doubt and makes questioning seem improper. I think that is manifest by the fact that Pres. Uchtdorf made such an explicit corrective remark. Not that the doctrine called for that, but the culture seemed to lean that way. So I hear some older folks who have since left the church complain that they were told not to ask questions and so forth. While there were some statements (even from apostles) that seemed to discourage questioning, there was also encouragement to ask.

    I like this statement from Brigham Young:

    But I am proud to say of my religion, I have studied it faithfully for twenty-two years, day and night, at home and abroad, upon the rivers, and upon the lakes, when traveling by sea and by land; have studied it in the pulpit; from morning till night; whatsoever might be my pursuit, I have studied it with as close an application any college student ever did any subject he wished to commit to memory; and I can say I have only just got into the A B C of it; it leads the vision of my mind into eternity.” (Journal of Discourses 1:41)

    When Joseph Smith said we believe all that God has revealed, all he is now revealing, and that he’ll yet reveal many “great and important things” in the future, he knew that members of the Church must be ready for new knowledge. I think you’ll like this talk from Hugh B. Brown, which I was reminded of by this recent address:

    [W]hile I believe all that God has revealed, I am not quite sure that I understand what he has revealed. The fact that he has promised further revelation is to me a challenge to keep an open mind and to be prepared to follow wherever my search for truth may lead…

    We have been blessed with much knowledge by revelation from God which, in some part, the world lacks. But there is an incomprehensibly greater part of truth which we must yet discover. Our revealed truth should leave us stricken with the knowledge of how little we really know. It should never lead to an emotional arrogance based upon a false assumption that we somehow have all the answers–that we in fact have a corner on truth, for we do not… continue your search for truth. And maintain humility sufficient to be able to revise your hypotheses as new truth comes to you by means of the spirit or the mind. Salvation, like education, is an ongoing process…

    I think the expression “Keep it cool” is peculiar to your age, but it means in reality: “Do not be impatient.” Too many young people are so impatient that when they press an electric button, they can’t wait for the answer… Remember, there is a power greater than yourselves upon which you may call.

    Comment by BHodges — November 13, 2009 @ 5:08 pm

  31. m&m #22: Great comment. Ardis, the thing about getting a different answer is something I talk a little about in that blog post about seeign through a glass darkly linked above. :)

    Comment by BHodges — November 13, 2009 @ 5:15 pm

  32. BHodges,

    I just read your post and it absolutely reflects many of my feelings.

    Thank for sharing it here too!

    Comment by Manuel — November 13, 2009 @ 5:17 pm

  33. And by your post I mean

    “I see through a glass darkly, and I kinda like it.“

    Comment by Manuel — November 13, 2009 @ 5:19 pm

  34. I am enjoying this posting, its links, the Elder’s talk, and the discussion here. My hope is that its essence — the notion of not fearing to have questions and to raise them and seek for answers — and its implications can take hold and continue beyond here and on into the councils and classrooms of the Church, but even more importantly, into all of our hearts and minds.

    Comment by wreddyornot — November 13, 2009 @ 6:56 pm

  35. Wonderful, Ardis. Thanks for posting this.

    I am late to the party, but if anyone is interested, I wrote in April about “faith”, “doubt” and “uncertainty” and how they generally are used by leaders in the Church. I think the biggest issue is that many members (and non-members) read “uncertainty” when Church leaders say “doubt” – but Church leaders dont mean “uncertainty” when they say “doubt”. Anyway, if anyone is interested, the link is:

    Faith, Doubt and Enduring Uncertainty

    Comment by Ray — November 13, 2009 @ 11:33 pm

  36. Ardis:

    Imprinted on my brain forever: “[W]e are a question-asking people.”

    Thank goodness, because I am still asking: Where did we come from? Why are we here? Where are we going?

    Thank goodness, because I must admit I love the questions more than the answers, sometimes.

    Our religion may be distinct from others more by the nature of our questions than by the nature of our answers — at least, that is my impression.

    Now, I need to go to bed — if only I could shut off my brain, … as I lie awake pondering MORE questions.

    …. but, first, THANKS!!!!!!!!!

    Comment by S.Faux — November 14, 2009 @ 10:53 pm

  37. […] to do with Institute. I spent a few weeks mind-mapping, and delivered the following. Then recently, Ardis linked to President Uchtdorf’s talk, which showed me I was thinking along the same lines he […]

    Pingback by “Preparing minds to be faithful”- A Sacrament Mtg Talk | Faith-Promoting Rumor — November 15, 2009 @ 9:36 pm

  38. I’ve posted my Sacrament mtg. talk mentioned above that dovetails with President Uchtdorf’s talk.

    Comment by Nitsav — November 15, 2009 @ 9:39 pm

  39. “But what about when my answers are out of line, or when there are no answers?”

    Matt W., I have recieved answers that were quite clear, but also seem very out of line. I think at that point we need to apply Elder Scott’s counsel from conference and ask “Is there more?”. We need to keep asking this until we can see how our out of line answers come into line. It takes a long, long time, but it is so worth it.

    Comment by Karen M. — November 16, 2009 @ 8:48 am

  40. Thank you for putting this up, Ardis- I needed to read it.

    Comment by Tracy M — November 19, 2009 @ 7:24 pm

  41. I echo the chorus of thanks. I appreciate it.

    Comment by Ben Pratt — November 19, 2009 @ 9:11 pm

  42. I think it takes a lot of courage to ask tough questions.

    Often, it takes more courage to listen and accept the answers.

    We as question-askers should always remember that.

    Comment by sam — November 20, 2009 @ 11:38 am

  43. Ardis-

    I haven’t read the entire talk yet, but in the excerpt President Uchtdorf specifically talks about asking GOD for our answers. (He speaks of receiving truth by revelation thru the Holy Ghost-Joseph Smith taking his questions to the Lord etc.)

    God is the ultimate source of truth, and He grants us knowledge as quickly as we are able to accept and act upon what we are given. To me-“doubters” take their questions to other people, to books outside of scripture and beyond authorized Priesthood power-often looking for those who have the same “doubts” they do-which isn’t an act of faith. It’s an act of distrust seeking validation to continue feeling how they want to.

    Asking questions with a “sincere heart” means being willing to accept whatever God reveals to us, even if He reveals that we have been wrong up to that point. It means being willing to change one’s mind and heart and come “into line” if we were “out of line” before. God knows our hearts and if we’ve already made up our minds about something, we’ve cut Him out of the process with our agency.

    Anyone who is sincerely seeking truth and knowledge should go to the purest source, the highest authority. And as julianna pointed out in #21-we need to have both faith and personal righteousness in our lives first. If we have both-and we still don’t get an answer-then for reasons known only to God-it wasn’t in our best interest to get the answer yet.

    Comment by SisterofJared — November 20, 2009 @ 9:52 pm

  44. Looks like the transcript is up!

    The Reflection in the Water.

    Comment by BHodges — April 15, 2010 @ 12:39 pm

  45. Hi. I just sort of stumbled across this article and loved it! I visited the link and tried to locate the exact article you quoted by Uchtdorf but I cannot find the exact text you quoted. I read The Reflection in the Water, but it is not there. Has it been changed? =/

    Comment by LightTheWay — June 26, 2011 @ 5:22 pm

  46. Yes, that’s the talk; this is the current link.

    When this post was written (November 9), the talk was available only in broadcast form and I transcribed these paragraphs while listening to the broadcast. It looks like some editing was done when the official printed version was prepared, a common practice. The material is still there, though, with the somewhat revised wording, near the end under the subheading “Is It True?”

    Comment by Ardis E. Parshall — June 26, 2011 @ 6:11 pm

Leave a comment

RSS feed for comments on this post.
TrackBack URI