A Prophet of God

[JLHPROF]

8 minutes ago, Robert F. Smith said:

Unfortunately, I don't think that inspiration and revelation can be neatly separated so easily.

Probably not.
 

[Stargazer]

On 9/20/2017 at 10:51 AM, Button Gwinnett said:

I have no first hand knowledge so this is complete speculation on my part, but I am going to guess that the 15 work things out by committee, have discussions amongst themselves, reason things out and ultimately reach a decision upon a vote is made to sustain the decision after they've prayed about it.  It is my belief that they interpret this process as revelation.  Long gone are the days when members should believe that Jesus has face to face personal priesthood interviews with these men.

Of course they must use their minds, reason it out, and come to a conclusion. 

8 But, behold, I say unto you, that you must study it out in your mind; then you must ask me if it be right, and if it is right I will cause that your bosom shall burn within you; therefore, you shall feel that it is right. (DC 9:8)

But we're talking about actual revelation here, not just assuming that their committee decision is a revelation. That's how the world got saddled with the Nicene Creed, after all. It's clearly not the way to go.

Have you read Elder Bruce R. McConkie's account of how the decision to offer the priesthood to all men regardless of color or race was arrived at?  Allow me to quote from it:

"After full discussion and full expression on the part of all concerned, President Kimball
suggested that we go forward with the prayer circle. He said that if it was agreeable with
the Brethren he would be mouth. President Kimball then importuned the Lord with great
fervor and faith. All the Brethren joined in his prayer as it was recited at the altar. He
asked that a revelation might be given manifesting the Lord’s mind and will on this
matter so that the issue could be resolved. It was one of those occasions when the one
who was mouth in the prayer, prayed by the power of the Spirit and was given expression
and guided in the words that were used and the sentences that were said. The spirit of
unity that had prevailed first in the meeting with all the Brethren and then in greater
manifestation and degree when the Presidency and the Twelve met alone, continued to
increase in the hearts of all present.

"While President Kimball prayed, the revelation came. When he ceased to pray, there was
a great pentecostal outpouring of the Spirit such as none of those present had ever before
experienced. There are no words to describe what then happened. It was something that
could only be felt in the hearts of the recipients and which can only be understood by the
power of the Spirit."

It appears that the Lord requires unanimity among his servants, and apparently why the priesthood ban was not lifted sooner.  Because that unanimity was lacking.

Cleon Skousen once wrote about an experience he had with a church council that was discussing a series of radio programs that he was to prepare and give, and how the final decision was arrived at. The council consisted of a number of priesthood leaders, including two or three members of the Quorum of the Twelve, with Harold B. Lee chairing the meeting. Also present in an administrative capacity and not yet a General Authority was a young Gordon B. Hinckley. Skousen said that they discussed it much as the above matter was discussed, kind of a round robin with each member of the committee expressing himself as to how the series of programs should go, and that the round went around a few times.  Skousen was initially worried that what was going to be asked of him was going to be something he couldn't physically accomplish, given his other commitments, but as the discussion continued it seemed to back off substantially until it seemed to him that it might be doable. Then suddenly, he said, "It happened."  There was a marvelous outpouring of approval and love such that he had never before felt, and every member of the committee just went silently contemplative for a minute or so. Then Elder Lee spoke, saying, "Well, Brethren, we have our answer. So, Brother Skousen go ahead with it and everything should be all right," and then the meeting broke up. Skousen spoke briefly with Br. Hinckley on the way out, asking "Did you feel that?"  Br. Hinckley smiled at him and asked: "Is that new to you?"  Skousen replied that, no, it wasn't, but he had never felt it so strongly before. Then Br. Hinckley stated "It's called 'waiting on the Lord.'"

Do we really need the Lord shouting at us with a voice of thunder?  In his exile, Elijah reported that the Lord spoke to him with a "still, small voice". 1 Kings 19:11-13

 

 

[Hamba Tuhan]

On 21/09/2017 at 8:26 AM, Avatar4321 said:

Second, I know that revelation is alive in the Church because I have been receiving revelation. And if a nobody like me can receive revelation from time to time by following the FP & 12, then there is no way they aren't receiving revelation by following their counsel

I was literally just thinking this. I refuse to believe that God's chosen prophets are somehow in possession of less -- or less frequent -- revelation than I am.

[Button Gwinnett]

6 minutes ago, Stargazer said:

Of course they must use their minds, reason it out, and come to a conclusion. 

8 But, behold, I say unto you, that you must study it out in your mind; then you must ask me if it be right, and if it is right I will cause that your bosom shall burn within you; therefore, you shall feel that it is right. (DC 9:8)

But we're talking about actual revelation here, not just assuming that their committee decision is a revelation. That's how the world got saddled with the Nicene Creed, after all. It's clearly not the way to go.

Have you read Elder Bruce R. McConkie's account of how the decision to offer the priesthood to all men regardless of color or race was arrived at?  Allow me to quote from it:

"After full discussion and full expression on the part of all concerned, President Kimball
suggested that we go forward with the prayer circle. He said that if it was agreeable with
the Brethren he would be mouth. President Kimball then importuned the Lord with great
fervor and faith. All the Brethren joined in his prayer as it was recited at the altar. He
asked that a revelation might be given manifesting the Lord’s mind and will on this
matter so that the issue could be resolved. It was one of those occasions when the one
who was mouth in the prayer, prayed by the power of the Spirit and was given expression
and guided in the words that were used and the sentences that were said. The spirit of
unity that had prevailed first in the meeting with all the Brethren and then in greater
manifestation and degree when the Presidency and the Twelve met alone, continued to
increase in the hearts of all present.

"While President Kimball prayed, the revelation came. When he ceased to pray, there was
a great pentecostal outpouring of the Spirit such as none of those present had ever before
experienced. There are no words to describe what then happened. It was something that
could only be felt in the hearts of the recipients and which can only be understood by the
power of the Spirit."

It appears that the Lord requires unanimity among his servants, and apparently why the priesthood ban was not lifted sooner.  Because that unanimity was lacking.

Cleon Skousen once wrote about an experience he had with a church council that was discussing a series of radio programs that he was to prepare and give, and how the final decision was arrived at. The council consisted of a number of priesthood leaders, including two or three members of the Quorum of the Twelve, with Harold B. Lee chairing the meeting. Also present in an administrative capacity and not yet a General Authority was a young Gordon B. Hinckley. Skousen said that they discussed it much as the above matter was discussed, kind of a round robin with each member of the committee expressing himself as to how the series of programs should go, and that the round went around a few times.  Skousen was initially worried that what was going to be asked of him was going to be something he couldn't physically accomplish, given his other commitments, but as the discussion continued it seemed to back off substantially until it seemed to him that it might be doable. Then suddenly, he said, "It happened."  There was a marvelous outpouring of approval and love such that he had never before felt, and every member of the committee just went silently contemplative for a minute or so. Then Elder Lee spoke, saying, "Well, Brethren, we have our answer. So, Brother Skousen go ahead with it and everything should be all right," and then the meeting broke up. Skousen spoke briefly with Br. Hinckley on the way out, asking "Did you feel that?"  Br. Hinckley smiled at him and asked: "Is that new to you?"  Skousen replied that, no, it wasn't, but he had never felt it so strongly before. Then Br. Hinckley stated "It's called 'waiting on the Lord.'"

Do we really need the Lord shouting at us with a voice of thunder?  In his exile, Elijah reported that the Lord spoke to him with a "still, small voice". 1 Kings 19:11-13

 

 

Thanks for sharing this and I do believe that it is applicable to the conversation.  Again only my own personal pov on this subject is that what happened in '78 with the lifting of the ban is the exception and not the rule.  I believe that most decisions are quite remedial and made after a lot of discussion, voted upon and then prayed over and then disseminated to the church.  The only recent exception to this might be the November policy which Elder Nelson seemed to suggest the decision was made within a much tighter group consisting of a few men in the Quorum of 12 and not by the entire body.

Edited September 21, 2017 by Button Gwinnett

[JLHPROF]

5 minutes ago, Hamba Tuhan said:

I was literally just thinking this. I refuse to believe that God's chosen prophets are somehow in possession of less -- or less frequent -- revelation than I am.

I don't think anyone doubts that they are praying and getting answers.  That blessing has always existed for anyone with faith.

So we would need to determine how that differs from revelation, or if it differs at all.
Why do some answers rise to the level of canonization?  What makes them different?

[Hamba Tuhan]

8 minutes ago, JLHPROF said:

I don't think anyone doubts that they are praying and getting answers.  That blessing has always existed for anyone with faith.

So we would need to determine how that differs from revelation, or if it differs at all.

I accept all communications from God -- whether by visions, prophetic dreams, the ministration of angels, words spoken in His own voice, or words spoken by the voice of the Holy Ghost -- to be revelation. I don't need the prophets to add a new section to the D&C each time one of the above happens in their councils. Considering the frequency of revelation in my life, this would be literally an impossibly task.

 

Edited September 21, 2017 by Hamba Tuhan

[JLHPROF]

13 minutes ago, Hamba Tuhan said:

I accept all communications from God -- whether by visions, prophetic dreams, the ministration of angels, words spoken in His own voice, or words spoken by the voice of the Holy Ghost -- to be revelation. I don't need the prophets to add a new section to the D&C each time one of the above happens in their councils. Considering the frequency of revelation in my life, this would be literally an impossibly task.

That still doesn't address if there is any differentiation between the kind of revelation that gets canonized and the kind of revelation that we or the prophets can experience on a daily basis.
If there is, I'd like to know what it is.
If there isn't that kind of lowers the authority of scriptural revelation a bit.

[Hamba Tuhan]

14 minutes ago, JLHPROF said:

If there isn't that kind of lowers the authority of scriptural revelation a bit.

Not if the the difference is expedience.

You really want there to be something that is somehow more authoritative than visions, angels, etc.?

Edited September 21, 2017 by Hamba Tuhan

[Stargazer]

38 minutes ago, Button Gwinnett said:

Thanks for sharing this and I do believe that it is applicable to the conversation.  Again only my own personal pov on this subject is that what happened in '78 with the lifting of the ban is the exception and not the rule.  I believe that most decisions are quite remedial and made after a lot of discussion, voted upon and then prayed over and then disseminated to the church.  The only recent exception to this might be the November policy which Elder Nelson seemed to suggest the decision was made within a much tighter group consisting of a few men in the Quorum of 12 and not by the entire body.

Does everything have to done according to revelation? I think not, though decisions of importance should and probably are made so.  And do they all have to have the imprimatur, "Thus saith the Lord"? Again, I think not.

The Lord does not, after all, operate His Prophet as if he were some kind of marionette.

[JLHPROF]

18 minutes ago, Hamba Tuhan said:

Not if the the difference is expedience.

You really want there to be something that is somehow more authoritative than visions, angels, etc.?

Considering how many times I've been told uncanonized revelation isn't binding on us I don't know how expedient it is.

[Hamba Tuhan]

6 minutes ago, JLHPROF said:

Considering how many times I've been told uncanonized revelation isn't binding on us I don't know how expedient it is.

To each, his own. As I said in my 'home teaching' visit to a former member last night, my appreciation of the living prophets has literally increased every year that I have lived. I often feel like climbing to the top of a tall tree and shouting out 'hallelujah' to passers-by because of the blessing of living in a day when prophets speak.

[wtrdog]

Give me a call when the "prophet," speaking in the first person like a normal human, actually claims to be a prophet. It's pretty silly to debate revelation when the so called revelators don't actually claim to be in possession of any. 

[Robert F. Smith]

2 hours ago, Stargazer said:

........................................................................  

Do we really need the Lord shouting at us with a voice of thunder?  In his exile, Elijah reported that the Lord spoke to him with a "still, small voice". 1 Kings 19:11-13

Elijah received at that time a very specific, detailed set of orders from God, very much the same way in which the late Apostle Richard G. Scott reported receiving detailed instructions for his assignment in Mexico (cited above).  I see no effective difference between the time of Elijah and nowadays on that score.  So, I am in full agreement with you on this.  We vastly underestimate what modern revelation entails.

[Robert F. Smith]

26 minutes ago, wtrdog said:

Give me a call when the "prophet," speaking in the first person like a normal human, actually claims to be a prophet. It's pretty silly to debate revelation when the so called revelators don't actually claim to be in possession of any. 

Hogwash, waterdog.  You probably need to read this thread before popping off with poppycock.

[Avatar4321]

1 hour ago, Stargazer said:

Does everything have to done according to revelation? I think not, though decisions of importance should and probably are made so.  And do they all have to have the imprimatur, "Thus saith the Lord"? Again, I think not.

The Lord does not, after all, operate His Prophet as if he were some kind of marionette.

The Lord specifically said we shouldn't wait to be commanded in all things but to do good in our own accord.

[Avatar4321]

34 minutes ago, wtrdog said:

Give me a call when the "prophet," speaking in the first person like a normal human, actually claims to be a prophet. It's pretty silly to debate revelation when the so called revelators don't actually claim to be in possession of any. 

well, general conference is in about a week or so

the prophets and apostles will be sharing many revelations and inspiring the saints then. You are invited to prayerfully watch with us

[wtrdog]

41 minutes ago, Avatar4321 said:

well, general conference is in about a week or so

the prophets and apostles will be sharing many revelations and inspiring the saints then. You are invited to prayerfully watch with us

I'll make a bet with you. If a single leader says "I am a prophet. God spoke to me and has given me a message to deliver to you. He said..." or anything reasonably equivalent, I will agree to regularly attend church for the next year. If I'm right and this doesn't happen what's fair? Instead of going to church you'll voltuneer at a homeless shelter during church hours for a year. 

[Avatar4321]

5 minutes ago, wtrdog said:

I'll make a bet with you. If a single leader says "I am a prophet. God spoke to me and has given me a message to deliver to you. He said..." or anything reasonably equivalent, I will agree to regularly attend church for the next year. If I'm right and this doesn't happen what's fair? Instead of going to church you'll voltuneer at a homeless shelter during church hours for a year. 

Somehow I doubt you'll actually hold to such a bet.

Besides there are no homeless shelters in town

[wtrdog]

1 minute ago, Avatar4321 said:

Somehow I doubt you'll actually hold to such a bet.

Besides there are no homeless shelters in town

Suggest something else then. Ill absolutely honor the agreement. Proof shall be provided. 

[Avatar4321]

24 minutes ago, wtrdog said:

Suggest something else then. Ill absolutely honor the agreement. Proof shall be provided. 

I have no reason to expect that. Nor do I have any desire to break the commandments by gambling nor do I wish to temp the Lord.

As the prophets have often stated when they are speaking for the Lord and you don't accept it, I truly have no reason to expect you to recognize when they do this time.

Besides, I don't want you to come to church because you lost a bet. I want you to come to Church because it's true and it teaches the way to eternal happiness.

[sunstoned]

1 hour ago, Avatar4321 said:

well, general conference is in about a week or so

the prophets and apostles will be sharing many revelations and inspiring the saints then. You are invited to prayerfully watch with us

They give talks. That's what our prophets, seers and revelators do now. They give talks just like Billy Graham does.  I have not heard any of them claim revelation.  Joseph Smith was not sly with this.  You knew when he was claiming revelation and when he was just speaking as Joseph.  He owned it.  Not so much with the Corporation of the First Presidency now. 

[Robert F. Smith]

1 hour ago, wtrdog said:

I'll make a bet with you. If a single leader says "I am a prophet. God spoke to me and has given me a message to deliver to you. He said..." or anything reasonably equivalent, I will agree to regularly attend church for the next year. If I'm right and this doesn't happen what's fair? Instead of going to church you'll voltuneer at a homeless shelter during church hours for a year. 

That is a setup, waterdog.  Even Jesus didn't make such hoity-toity and self-important declarations.  He might ask, "Who do men say that I am?"  Or he might get up and read a portion of Torah on the Sabbath in his home synagogue, then sit down and comment in powerful fashion.  You might want to ask first, What do prophets ordinarily do and say, now and in times past?  What sort of patterns do authentic prophets follow?  Do you prefer reality or mockery?

[wtrdog]

43 minutes ago, Robert F. Smith said:

That is a setup, waterdog.  Even Jesus didn't make such hoity-toity and self-important declarations.  He might ask, "Who do men say that I am?"  Or he might get up and read a portion of Torah on the Sabbath in his home synagogue, then sit down and comment in powerful fashion.  You might want to ask first, What do prophets ordinarily do and say, now and in times past?  What sort of patterns do authentic prophets follow?  Do you prefer reality or mockery?

What? Stop trying to sound fancy. First, the "modern" guys do not at all resemble the biblical examples. They were very transparent about the epistemological nature of their spiritual experiences. Specifics about what they experienced, when, where, and how. Second, you don't have a clue what Christ would or wouldn't do. You've got a 38th hand perspective on what some completely unknown party thinks. One thing I've never understood is how the bible can a treated as so errant and yet literal at the same time. 

[Avatar4321]

1 hour ago, sunstoned said:

They give talks. That's what our prophets, seers and revelators do now. They give talks just like Billy Graham does.  I have not heard any of them claim revelation.  Joseph Smith was not sly with this.  You knew when he was claiming revelation and when he was just speaking as Joseph.  He owned it.  Not so much with the Corporation of the First Presidency now. 

Funny. Because I have. Elder Rasband gave an excellent talk on the matter last conference

Edited September 22, 2017 by Avatar4321

[wtrdog]

16 hours ago, Avatar4321 said:

I have no reason to expect that. Nor do I have any desire to break the commandments by gambling nor do I wish to temp the Lord.

As the prophets have often stated when they are speaking for the Lord and you don't accept it, I truly have no reason to expect you to recognize when they do this time.

Besides, I don't want you to come to church because you lost a bet. I want you to come to Church because it's true and it teaches the way to eternal happiness.

I thought as much, all talk, no real faith. There is no setup here. Ill give you my IRL info by PM. You can call my bishop and he will confirm how I've been absent the past two years but started attending after conference for some inexplicable reason.  And it wouldn't be for the wrong reason either. If I'm wrong, tell you what, bet or not ill go back for at least a year. Even if you aren't willing to actually live your convictions, I will. If the leaders dispensed with their prevaricating and demonstrated real honesty for once, that would be a huge sign for me that maybe they are actually inspired. Some virtue worth hanging around for.  Ill add another condition too. Instead of making an unambiguous claim about being a prophet and receiving revelation, ill also accept the opposite. Like if a q15 were to talk about how when they were a 70 they imagined they'd get to see Christ or at least have a vision or something if they ever became an apostle, but nope. Let down. Their spiritual experiences are no different than anybody else, just subjective feelings too, sometimes they even entertain, gasp, doubts. In other words, if a leader simply demystifies the whole thing and is fully transparent. Honest. I predict neither happens.

Clean up the attitude please. You are close to being thread banned.