8 Things I Have Learned From Listening to 6,000 General Conference Talks

In January 2017 I decided I wanted more focus in my gospel study. So I set a New Year’s Resolution to listen to 1000 conference talks. What started as a New Year’s Resolution has transformed into a gospel-learning quest to study every single conference report. I recently passed my 6000th conference talk in my study and I wanted to share some reflections and things that I have learned from my studies. So here are 8 things I have learned from studying 6000+ conference talks:

1st. The Conference Reports are the most disrespected volume of scripture.

If I asked you what was the most disrespected volume of Scriptures by the Latter-day Saints you might be inclined to choose the Bible, or more specifically the Old Testament. And I can understand why you would choose that. Generally speaking, the Old Testament is disrespected and ignored by most Christians. But I would argue, that at least with the advent of Come, Follow Me, we are giving the Old Testament more respect than the Latter-day Prophets, whose teachings I believe are the most disrespected volume of scripture.

We are told, by the Lord, that: “What I the Lord have spoken, I have spoken, and I excuse not myself; and though the heavens and the earth pass away, my word shall not pass away, but shall all be fulfilled, whether by mine own voice or by the voice of my servants, it is the same.” (D&C 1:38) If we believed the Lord and viewed the words of His prophets as the words of the Lord himself then how we viewed the conference reports would immediately change.

How many of us when we need help turn to the world? When we need Marriage advice, we turn to podcasts/books or therapists. Financial advice? We turn to Dave Ramsey or another financial planner. But imagine if you knew that the Lord had given you direct advice on how to have a successful marriage, would you listen? What about dating advice? Or if the Lord gave you direct financial advice? Well, He has! Most Political, Social, Moral, and Family issues have had prophets and apostles speak about them in the conference reports, repeatedly. Yet, when we have questions do we turn to the words of the prophet and search them? Or do we turn to worldly sources because they are “easier” to access?

Speaking of the conference reports, President Spencer W. Kimball taught: “No text or volume outside the standard works of the Church should have such a prominent place on your personal library shelves—not for their rhetorical excellence or eloquence of delivery, but for the concepts which point the way to eternal life” (In the World but Not of It, Brigham Young University Speeches of the Year [May 14, 1968], 2–3). Howard W. Hunter went further encouraging us to make the conference reports a “regular part of our personal study” and even called them a “supplement to or an extension of the Doctrine and Covenants” (See Ensign, Nov. 2004)

So it is either out of contempt or laziness that we disregard the prophets. I am not saying every single person needs to read all the conference reports, but I do think that if you have questions/concerns or need counsel, you should follow the advice of President Nelson who said, “Never take counsel from those who do not believe. Seek guidance from voices you can trust—from prophets, seers, and revelators and from the whisperings of the Holy Ghost, who ‘will show unto you all things what ye should do.’ Please do the spiritual work to increase your capacity to receive personal revelation.”

So, are you willing to “Seek [out the] guidance” that the “prophets, seers, and revelators” have already given you? Are you willing to “do the spiritual work?” to be familiar enough with the words of the prophets that you can “increase your capacity to receive personal revelation?”

NOTE: three great resources for studying topics from the conference reports are 1st: Corpus of LDS General Conference Talks which is basically like Google but for the conference reports allowing you to search keywords. 2nd: the BYU Scripture Citation Index which allows you to read many of the talks not included on the gospel library app. You can search by year/conference, or by verse quoted by the speaker. Both of these two tools are free and have revolutionized my efforts to understand the Word of the Lord to us through His Prophets. 3rd. Archive.Org’s digital collection of official Conference Reports dating back over 120 years.

2nd. We were thoroughly warned.

The most shocking aspect of my study has been realizing how thoroughly we were warned of today’s situation. As I read the prophets and their stark and dire warnings for disobedience. I think of the repeated quote from J. Reuben Clark, Jr. “A prophet has spoken—the prophet is speaking. We do not need another prophet. What we need is a listening ear” (Conference Report, Oct. 1948, pp. 79–80). One thing I have noticed is that the prophets typically warn us about issues years and decades before they go critical. Here are a few examples of warnings we failed to heed and now we are facing the consequences.

Sex Education/Social Emotional Learning SEL

Arguably one of the most important topics in Western Society right now is sex education. Many progressives demand that young children be taught LGBTQIA+ lifestyles as healthy and normal. Nearly 60 years ago three apostles in a single conference warned about the dangers of Sex Education being handed over to the schools, their warnings could’ve been issued just yesterday:

“President Joseph F. Smith was right when he said that false educational ideas would be one of the three threats to the Church within. Another threat, and he said it is the most serious of the three, would be sexual impurity. Today we have both of these threats combined in the growing and increasingly amoral program of sex education in the schools.” Ezra Taft Benson (CR, Apr. 1969).

“If we accept the evil doctrines of slanted educational programs, we will witness a breakdown of morals that could bring about a depraved new social order… These deceptive and shadowed objectives of well-propagandized programs are moving at a very rapid clip. The first to which I refer is sex education or family life education, which is placing emphasis on raw sex in the school classroom, creating widespread contention, causing deep concern among parents and leaders. The programmers of this type of sex education, aware of resistance, are fortified with worked-out methods to deal with parental and community opposition.” President Alvin R. Dyer (CR, Apr. 1969).

“Sex education belongs in the home, where parents can teach chastity in a spiritual environment as they reveal the facts of life to their children. There, in all plainness, the youngsters can be taught that procreation is part of the creative work of God and that, therefore, the act of replenishing the earth must be kept on the high plane of personal purity that God provides, free from all forms of perversion. Unskilled parents can learn to teach their children properly. In fact, God commands it, and who are we to disobey? Why do some attempt to supersede the parents instead of teaching them how to fulfill their responsibility?” Mark E. Petersen (CR, Apr. 1969).

The war on gender

Aside from the prophetic warning known as the Family Proclamation, we were warned that if the defense of traditional marriage failed, it would not end with the legalization of gay marriage but that they would then attack gender.

“One cannot degrade marriage without tarnishing other words as well, such words as boy, girl, manhood, womanhood, husband, wife, father, mother, baby, children, family, home.” President Boyd K. Packer. Apr. 1981

“When evil wants to strike out and disrupt the essence of God’s work, it attacks the family. It does so by attempting to disregard the law of chastity, to confuse gender, to desensitize violence, to make crude and blasphemous language the norm, and to make immoral and deviant behavior seem like the rule rather than the exception.” President M. Russell Ballard. Oct. 2003

Class Warfare.

In the world today everyone is split into classes or categories fighting against each other. But back in 1941, we were warned about this: “A new danger — American being arrayed against American in a new line of class demarkation which will divide this great nation, and, as has been said, ‘a house divided against itself cannot stand.’” Joseph L. Wirthlin. CR: Apr. 1941 pp 70

Government Spending.

A whole host of apostles warned of government spending. Joseph F. Merrill, Joseph L. Wirthlin, and Marion G. Romney, all have amazing talks on government spending. But my favorite quote comes from President Benson, at a time the US Debt was just under 300 Billion he said:

“We must protect the Lord’s base of operations by moving away from unsound economic policies which encourage creeping socialism and its companion, insidious, atheistic communism. If we are to protect this important base, we must as a nation live within our means, balance our budgets, and pay our debts.” Ezra Taft Benson. CR: Apr. 1962.

I don’t think that words can do this justice. So let me show you a graph. NOTE this graph is a year old, so obviously our debt has increased by nearly 3 Trillion more dollars (nearly 10% of our total debt) in a single year.

Unity

Unity was one of the most addressed topics in the 1940s and 1950s general conferences. But unlike today, where we talk about Unity as something we do not have but want, many of the talks back then were about maintaining our unity. They outlined that unity is only achievable when we follow the prophet. Stephen L Richards taught: “The foe is attacking our unity. We in Zion have enjoyed a most uncommon reputation for unity of purpose and achievement. This has come about because it has ever been our disposition to follow and yield obedience to our leaders.” CR: Oct. 1951 pp 114

3rd. Changing Focuses does not equal changing doctrine.

Whenever someone hears I am reading old conference talks they immediately ask if I’ve gotten back to the ‘wild’ talks and where they taught crazy doctrine. Or they ask if I’ve gone far enough back to see the doctrine change. Simply put, in 6000+ conference talks I have not. From 1941-2023 I have observed no doctrinal shift or change, even if the messaging has changed. The policy for sure has changed, and the focus has absolutely changed.

One of the prime examples of this would be the fact that in the 1940s, 50s, and 60s there were literally hundreds of references and denouncements of Socialism and Communism. And they were NOT exclusive to Ezra Taft Benson, but rather every single member of the First Presidency denounced Communism, Socialism, or both. They even issued official Church statements denouncing them as ideologies incompatible with the gospel. But suddenly in the late 1960’s all references to socialism/communism vanished.

I have had countless progressive Latter-day Saints cite this shift as proof it was merely “Cold War” rhetoric. But while listening to the Conference reports you learn WHY they had a change in focus. In 1969 David O. McKay after repeating the Church’s stance against Communism taught: that “converts to the Church come from all nations, representing diverse views on controversial issues. Ours must be the responsibility to teach our members from all nations the true doctrines of Christ with such power that they be fortified against all false ideas, regardless of the label under which they may be presented.” (CR: Apr. 1969 page 96). This talk marked a shift away from decrying communism/socialism by name, and instead the efforts to decry the undergirding principles of the ideologies.

I see the wisdom in this shift all the time when I share a quote decrying socialism/communism I see people dismiss it simply by saying that the label does not apply. “What Marion G. Romney called Socialism is not what Socialism really is”. But by changing the approach from attaching the label directly, to teaching the base principle to correct evil “regardless of the label under which they may be presented” this issue is prevented.

4th. Anti-Mormons rely on ignorance to deceive members.

I cannot stress this point enough, Anti-Mormons rely on ignorance to deceive members. In my study of the Conference Reports and the Ensign (Yes, I read all the Ensign’s from 1971-2020 over the last 2 years while doing this conference study). I have noticed that simply reading official church publications debunks the majority of anti-Mormon narratives.

For example, one common anti-Mormon narrative is that the “Church hid” our history. They cite the fact that there are multiple accounts of the First Vision and most members were only familiar with the account in JSH (Joseph Smith History). But this narrative falls apart when reading the conference reports and the Ensign when you realize the Church published an expose “Joseph Smith’s Recitals of the First Vision” diving into the different accounts and their differences in 1985… Yes, that is right, nearly 40 years ago. And it was not buried in the back of the magazine, it was the third article after only the First Presidency Message and a message from Thomas S. Monson!

Another example is the attacks against President Benson, I read a scholarly article (if you can call it that) bashing Benson. It cited the fact he was sent to Europe to be the Mission President as an extraordinary step to get him out of the USA and away from politics. But this narrative completely collapsed while studying the conference reports. Because, at the start of almost every conference report, it lists those general authorities who were not in attendance due to health OR being overseas due to them heading up the various missions around the world! While studying the conference reports I learned that it was commonplace for apostles to be called to spearhead missionary efforts across multiple missions and to go live and travel in those areas while on assignment, sometimes missing conferences.

It honestly shocked me how many “hidden” things I found in the Ensign and Conference Reports. When I brought this up to a Church historian he retorted, “Oh, we say if you want to hide something from the members just put it in the Ensign (now Liahona).”

5th. The context of quotes matters.

When we talk about the context of quotes, often we talk about textual context. IE, what was he saying in the paragraph before or after the quote? Textual context is vital, but another form of context I learned from studying the conference reports is setting context. I want to touch on both, starting with setting context:

Setting Context.

One of the biggest disadvantages of how today’s society studies is the fact that we often study things out of context. We listen to a single talk from a general conference, perhaps as part of a study of all the sermons of a given speaker. This is not bad per se, but you lose the spiritually powerful setting context that is missed when we study exclusively this way.

For example, when President Nelson was called as the President of the Church, a lot of people decided to listen to all his general conference talks. This strengthened many people’s testimonies (I will touch more on this in another point). Coincidently, I was listening to the April 1984 General Conference at the same time. I listened as Gordon B. Hinckley announced the calls of two new apostles Russell M. Nelson and Dallin H Oaks, I too listened to his first talk, but I also listened to the other talks in April 1984 where multiple apostles started their talks testifying of the call and work the Lord had in store for Russell M. Nelson and Dallin H. Oaks. And as I listened to these testimonies, from apostles I had come to love the Spirit bore witness to me that President Nelson was called and prepared to be the prophet at this time.

Another benefit of setting context is understanding that a talk was not an outlier. Often times people discard a teaching from a prophet/apostle like President Benson caulking up his teaching to being merely his opinion, or that he was the only one who talked about said topic. But when one listens to the entire conference and hears David O. McKay opens the conference with a warning against communism, followed a few talks later by J. Ruben Clark repeating the same thing, and then Benson delivers remarks on the same topic, and finally Mark E. Petersen drives the topic home once again, you realize that it was not one witness, it was a multitude of witnesses.

Textual Context.

Textual context matters! Whenever I see a quote that does not make sense, the first thing I do is look up the textual context. Often the textual context completely changes the quotation being shared. For example, I was reading a scholarly article on JSTOR about President Benson being rebuked by the Brethren. It cited Hugh B. Brown in the April 1962 General Conference as evidence. The citation read:

“going about and calling everyone a communist who disagrees with his personal political bias. There is no excuse for members of this Church, especially men who hold the priesthood, to be opposing one another over communism.”

This article made it sound like Hugh B. Brown was defending communism and denouncing Benson. I thought that was an odd quote so I looked up the context. Hugh B. Brown delivered the following that this quote was taken out of:

Now, brethren, we who are assembled tonight here and in 320 other places should form a great bulwark against communism and its attendant evils. The efficiency of our opposition to them depends upon the way we honor our priesthood and place ourselves in a position to seek and obtain God’s help in fighting evil. Communism is of the devil. Communism started when the devil was cast out of heaven because of his rebelling against the will of his Father that men should have their free agency. Satan and his emissaries would rob men of their priceless freedom. We do not wish tonight to enter into a long discussion of this evil, but it is well that all men know that the Church and the leaders of the Church stand squarely against communism.

To emphasize this I refer to what President Grant, President Clark, and President McKay wrote sometime ago:

“The Church does not interfere, and has no intention of trying to interfere with the fullest and freest exercise of the political franchise of its members, under and within our Constitution. . . .

“But Communism is not a political party nor a political plan under the Constitution; it is a system of government that is the opposite of our Constitutional government, and it would be necessary to destroy our Government before Communism could be set up in the United States.”

I wish you would read the rest of it yourselves and see what the stand of the First Presidency was at that time, and I think I can authoritatively say to you that the position of the First Presidency has not changed since that time.

But, brethren, beware that you do not become extremists on either side. The degree of a man’s aversion to communism may not always be measured by the noise he makes in going about and calling everyone a communist who disagrees with his personal political bias. There is no excuse for members of this Church, especially men who hold the priesthood, to be opposing one another over communism; we are all unalterably opposed to it, but we must be united in our fight against it. Let us not undermine our government or accuse those who hold office of being soft on communism. Furthermore, our chapels and meetinghouses should not be made available to men who seek financial gain or political advantage by destroying faith in our elected officials under the guise of fighting communism. Let self-appointed protectors of our freedom finance their own schemes. We call upon the priesthood of the Church to stand together with a solid front against everything that would rob men of their God-given freedom.

President Hugh B. Brown, General Conference, April 1962

6th LISTEN when Apostle/Prophet says “In other words”

One of my favorite things to hear an apostle/prophet say is: “In other words.” When they do this, they are giving a clarification of scripture. These clarifications often radically change our understanding of the verse. Now, they don’t always come out and say “in other words” Sometimes they will quote the verse and then rephrase or use the language of the verse to clarify. Let me illustrate both of these methods with examples:

In D&C 98:9-10 we are warned, “Nevertheless, when the wicked rule the people mourn. Wherefore, honest men and wise men should be sought for diligently, and good men and wise men ye should observe to uphold; otherwise whatsoever is less than these cometh of evil.”

These verses, verse 10 particularly, are used by members to attack their political opponents. They insist that their opponent is dishonest and therefore this verse disqualifies them from support. But Marion G. Romney gives us a clarification after citing the above verses, by saying: “We should seek diligently for and support men to represent us in government who are ‘wise’ enough to understand freedom — as provided for in the Constitution and as implemented in the United Order — and who are honest enough and good enough to fight to preserve it.” (GC: Apr. 1966 pp 99).

This radically changes and clarifies our duty in vetting political candidates in accordance with scripture.

In D&C 104:15–17 the Lord outlined His welfare plan, in verse 17 He stated: “I, the Lord, have decreed to provide for my saints, that the poor shall be exalted, in that the rich are made low.”

The world is always trying to tear down the rich and give the poor a handout and sometimes a hand-up. Harold B. Lee clarified the Lord’s purposes when he said that via the Church Welfare Program, “The poor would be exalted, or in other words stimulated to success and pride, and uplifted because the rich have been made low, or in other words, because the rich have been made humble and willing to give of their substance, their time, and their talent, and their wisdom, and their example that the poor might be thus guided and directed.” (GC: Oct. 1941 pp 113).

Once again, it radically changes and clarifies the meaning of the verse.

7th. As you read, you gain a testimony.

One of my side studies while working through the conference reports was listening to all the Teachings of the Presidents of the Church. I did this to “shake” things up. But it was while doing this side study that I first realized that many of these men the Church says are prophets and apostles I had never actually heard more than a random quote from them.

As I truly studied the words of these prophets during this side study the Holy Spirit testified to my soul that they were called of God. I don’t know everything, I can’t explain a lot. But it was during this time that I gained a real solid testimony that Brigham Young was a prophet in word and deed. Once my side study was finished when I ran into a new prophet or apostle in my conference report studies I found myself asking God for a witness they were called of God, and as I read, the Spirit would testify to my soul.

One example was during a run, I was listening to the old conference reports about David O. McKay and someone bore testimony that he was the prophet of God. At that moment of my run, in mid-stride, the Spirit hit me like a semi-truck. It was so powerful that I lost my strength and almost fell over. I just crouched there with one hand on the ground panting for air as I kept hearing the words “David O. McKay is a prophet of God!” over and over in my head. After waiting there for a few minutes my strength returned and I finished my run. As I got home I excitedly proclaimed to my wife that I had “gained a testimony” of President McKay’s prophetic call on my run.

So if you struggle with a prophet/apostle. READ/Listen to their words. Pray and ask God for a witness of their call, but actually get into what they said. Not what others have said about them, not what others claim they have said. But their actual words. And as you do so, I can testify from repeated experience, you will gain a personal testimony of their call.

8th. You can reread the same conference talk again and get something totally different out of it.

I started my quest to read all the modern conference talks in January 2017. When I started I was single, and naturally, as I listened I found quotes/talks that applied to me. Therefore, most of the insights I had were about dating. In 2019 I got married and started to raise a family. I have since started highlighting talks about the importance of family. As I have gone back to the talks I first listened to 7 years ago I am shocked to find home-run talks about the family that I did not even remember being given from my first time through.

But this is how prophetic teachings work! As we read, and reread the scriptures, our patriarchal blessing, and conference talks we will glean insights from the Holy Ghost that apply to our life right now. Rereading that same scripture/talk/blessing in 5-10 years may yield completely different insights from the exact same text!

https://mylifebygogogoff.com/2022/12/6-new-years-resolutions-every-latter-day-saint-should-consider.htmlI guess what I am saying is don’t think that just because you have “read” something or “listened” to a given talk you can’t still learn more from studying it!

If you liked this article you might enjoy this one “7 New Year’s Resolutions Every Latter-day Saint Should Consider!“