Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
SouthernMo

Evidence of a Prophet

Recommended Posts

Posted (edited)
1 hour ago, SouthernMo said:

Sure. This is fine!  Anyone can define a prophet however they want!  I’m just wondering if being able to know what will happen and state that to others is part o the definition. In Mormonism, it seems that is a very minor aspect of the role/title.

There is a difference between pulling a random definition on a whim out if the air and trying to connect a definition to a particular place and time as LDS teachings do for "prophet".  You seem to be treating LDS teachings as the first when they are the second.

Sure, it is part of the definition as in one thing a prophet may do as sometimes God wants us to know what is coming.  But it isn't, imo, an absolute requirement.  It is up to God, imo, what he wants the prophet to share of his mind and then the prophet needs to work on conveying that as best he can.

Think of it like "parent".  One of the many things associated with that role is changing diapers, but one can be a parent and never, ever change a diaper (for example, someone who adopts an older child).  There are some things that are essential to the role of parent, others often done, but not necessary.

There are examples in the Bible of those considered prophets that foretold events.  Others did not.  The word translated as "diviner" (which could be someone who foretold) means "false prophet", so foretelling might be done by those who weren't prophets.

Edited by Calm
  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post
14 minutes ago, SouthernMo said:

Maybe. See my earlier post. Does god have to intervene for it to be a miracle?  Or can we call any natural cycle or law a miracle?  Gravity = miracle where we can see god helping those in need?

 

I didn’t mean to say that God didn’t intervene. After all, timing was critical in this event. It’s just that He used the tools at hand to accomplish His goals. 

Share this post


Link to post
Posted (edited)
1 hour ago, SouthernMo said:

Darn it heck!  It seems most people here seem to be extremely unnecessarily defensive of LDS prophets for some reason!

I don’t want anything. President Nelson, Monson, Hinckley, whoever can call themselves prophets and people can call them prophets! They’ve done some great things. I feel the Holy Ghost when they speak sometimes. I’m just addressing one aspect of what a prophet can do (per the LDS Bible Dictionary), and wondering how much of that has been done in “these latter days.”

If you had left it at your first post, that is how I would describe your comments.

But your second iirc post in this thread stated this:

Quote

If I expect a man who we are asked to sustain as a prophet to prophecy, maybe it is my expectations that are misaligned with what a prophet really is.

That question as to whether your expectations were misaligned is what .I was responding to.

I have no problem with seeing if modern prophets have been sharing any obviously fulfilled predictions.  That part of the conversation I am pretty much ignoring.

Edited by Calm
  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Posted (edited)

One more thought before I wander off to Amazon Prime...

I don't believe either the Bible or modern gospel teachings force accurate foretelling/predictions to be the sole dominion of true prophets, even as just a possible part of their role.

The Bible and other scriptures allow for deceiving spirits to manipulate truth.  Then there is just intelligent guessing.  If enough people do it and fool themselves that they are psychic or whatever, chances are something may get close enough to be considered a possible hit and therefore that person could be described as a foreteller ( though doing it multiple times and providing explicit detail would indicate not coincidence...just saying we can't eliminate the possibility of coincidence confusing the picture of foretelling).  Then there is outright fraud where the fraud is hidden (think insider trading that never gets caught) so there is no way to tell it wasn't actually foretelling.

So if someone is trying to use foretelling as a way to distinguish actual prophets as understood in the Bible and among Saints, I think they have two problems.  

As mentioned before, prophets as defined by the Bible do not all foretell, so having accurate foretellings can't be used to exclude possible prophets. (As in no fuffilled foretellings equals no actual prophet)

And since others besides prophets may be actual foretellers, foretelling can't really be used to include possible candidates for beingbtrue prophets. (As in fulfilled foretelling equals actual prophet).

I don't have a problem with saying demonstrating an accurate foretelling can contribute to our exploration of someone as a possible prophet and inform our understanding of his mission, but in the end the only test of value in my mind is if God confirms the individual is his spokesperson.

Edited by Calm

Share this post


Link to post
14 hours ago, SouthernMo said:

What do you think the purpose of sustaining the Q15 as “Prophets, Seers, and Revelators”?

Why not just sustain them as presiding keyholders?

Or they could be sustained as the corporation of the the first presidency.  A legal title which they hold.  The church is a successful and well run organization.  It has amassed substantial wealth and real estate holdings.  I would place the leadership of the church in the same category the heads of  IBM, Microsoft and other long running and profitable  companies.  IMO there is nothing to distinguish the church leadership from any one of a dozen or so top corporations.

Share this post


Link to post
14 hours ago, SouthernMo said:

The article on Fair Mormon about this subject seems to indicate that it was shared more broadly than commonly believed - and by many close to him.

Do you have a point I’m missing, or are you just giving context to the revelation?

From the context I take it that Presidents of the Church may receive personal revelation about future events in relation to what they need to do in behalf of the Church, and may not publish them, may share them with a few, may keep them in their personal journals, etc. Evidently Joseph was figuring out the wisdom of how much to share and how broadly in relation to what he actually needed to get done as President. The revelation didn't have a time frame for fulfillment (we live under a few of these now!). I don't know anyone who has shared their personal revelations about future events, and I think I would be careful myself, and would rather keep an eye out for the signs of the times of fulfillment in order to prepare accordingly, and be open to other revelations that perhaps require more immediate attention and action.

Share this post


Link to post
Posted (edited)
49 minutes ago, CV75 said:

From the context I take it that Presidents of the Church may receive personal revelation about future events in relation to what they need to do in behalf of the Church, and may not publish them, may share them with a few, may keep them in their personal journals, etc. Evidently Joseph was figuring out the wisdom of how much to share and how broadly in relation to what he actually needed to get done as President. The revelation didn't have a time frame for fulfillment (we live under a few of these now!). I don't know anyone who has shared their personal revelations about future events, and I think I would be careful myself, and would rather keep an eye out for the signs of the times of fulfillment in order to prepare accordingly, and be open to other revelations that perhaps require more immediate attention and action.

CV75 as I read your post it struck me that perhaps for an audience there is no way of knowing (at the moment) whether the President is speaking as a Revelator or as a Seer.  Does it matter, perhaps Presidents only use Seer obtained knowledge to guide and protect the Saints and never speak directly on those things.  I am not sure, what say you.

Edited by Metis_LDS
Word Past Tense
  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
13 hours ago, SouthernMo said:

Darn it heck!  It seems most people here seem to be extremely unnecessarily defensive of LDS prophets for some reason!

I don’t want anything. President Nelson, Monson, Hinckley, whoever can call themselves prophets and people can call them prophets! They’ve done some great things. I feel the Holy Ghost when they speak sometimes. I’m just addressing one aspect of what a prophet can do (per the LDS Bible Dictionary), and wondering how much of that has been done in “these latter days.”

The emotional defense I’m sensing  from y’all of this title and word is so telling!  Defensiveness often stems from insecurity.  But maybe I’m wrong.

SoMo,

I don't think people are feeling defensive as much as frustrated. You started this thread by asking a legitimate question and then every time someone has given you an answer that they feel is equally legitimate you have shot it down and told them they are wrong and their answer wasn't good enough.

Watching you manage this thread is like watching the Gospel Doctrine teacher get up and ask a question and get perfectly valid responses. But instead of recognizing the response as valid they shoot it down because it isn't the response they want because it doesn't tie into the point they wanted to make in the lesson. But in the mean time, it leaves the rest of the class frustrated and not wanting to participate, because their responses were valid but just didn't match the teacher's goal.

I feel like you already know the answer to your question - in your view there is only a single instance in Mormon history that would qualify as prophecy and everything else is just good intentions, good guesses, and hopeful wishing.

I am not really sure of what else you want from the rest of us in this thread? I don't think any of us can come up with other examples that meet your expectations and definition of prophecy and when we try we are told we are wrong.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
1 hour ago, Metis_LDS said:

CV75 as I read your post it struck me that perhaps for an audience there is no way of knowing (at the moment) whether the President is speaking as a Revelator or as a Seer.  Does it matter, perhaps Presidents only use Seer obtained knowledge to guide and protect the Saints and never speak directly on those things.  I am not sure, what say you.

I think that is very plausible. I think Prophets, Seers and Revelators also have the responsibility to weigh a personal versus a general revelation. 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Posted (edited)
20 hours ago, SouthernMo said:

Porn/chastity - church was not the first there. Those are Judeo-Christian teachings from thousands of years before Joseph Smith “prophesied” anything about those.

Alcohol consumption/Smoking/tobacco - Joseph Smith didn’t add much there.  Prohibition Groups all across the country were active in the decades of the early 19th century. Kirtland had a particularly active group in the 1830’s.

Well, let me put it this way. The church was out front in seeing the dangers of porn on family life because of its addiction. It may be true that some churches did at first see porn as a sin. However, it was the lds church that held firm in seeing the dangers of it. And warned lds members of its dangers. Also, many ex lds mocked the lds because of its stance on porn. But the lds church was proven right. Prohibition was ended and the church held firm. They were out front of it. Likewise for tobacco. If more people were lds they would be much healthier and family life would be less violent. The word of wisdom is fast becoming embraced by many people who want a healthier lifestyle, especially the part that recommends to eat meat sparingly .

Edited by why me

Share this post


Link to post

It happens that of the 28 Biblical Tests for True and False Prophets that I found in the Bible the test of prophesy is the one most qualitifed by precept and example and most abused in practice even within the Bible.

For a parallel list of tests for True and False Prophets:

https://www.fairmormon.org/answers/Biblical_Keys_for_Discerning_True_and_False_Prophets/Tests

Overview

https://www.fairmormon.org/answers/Biblical_Keys_for_Discerning_True_and_False_Prophets

I have a short discussion of some of the issues with interpretation here:

https://www.fairmormon.org/answers/Biblical_Keys_for_Discerning_True_and_False_Prophets/Tests/Prophecy

There was a good FARMS Preliminary Report by Lisa Bolin Hawkins and David Warby on Jewish application of the Law, and how they restricted it to obviously short term prophesy and consistency with known scripture and prophesy.  Alas, I don't see it at the Maxwell Archive/

Warby, David, and Lisa B. Hawkins. “The Crime of False Prophecy under Ancient Israelite Law.” FARMS Preliminary Report. Provo, UT: FARMS, 1983

But there is David Warby essay that overlaps the topic in Studia antiqua here:

https://rsc.byu.edu/sites/default/files/studia_antiqua/Studia Antiqua 3-2.pdf

Since a very clear definition of the characteristics of true and false prophets exists in the Bible, if a person chooses to accept it, testing Joseph Smith against that definition is very simple. 

https://www.fairmormon.org/answers/Biblical_Keys_for_Discerning_True_and_False_Prophets/Considering_Joseph_Smith/Preliminary_test

Unfortunately, it is easier and simpler to simply come up with a personal definition, essentially saying, that person is not what I think a prophet should be, and not what I want a person to be (that is, doesn't live to my personal ideals, and asks for sacrifices that I don't want to make).  I spent years gathering a list of over 70 arguments made by Biblical peoples against true prophets and eventually realized that they amount to a person saying, "It's not what I think, and is not what I want."  Asking whether there is any evidence that Joseph Smith's inspiration is Real is a very different test than asking whether he or his followers ever did or said anything I disagree with or don't want to hear.

I find it interesting therefore, that, the Biblical passages that describe what a person should to to see truth offers set of recommendations that require the person to make the sacrifice of a contrite spirit, (an offering of that they think) and a broken heart (an offering of what they desire) as necessary to see truth (What is real).  Scott Peck defines sanity as a commitment to reality at all costs.  That is, reality is the pearl of great price, worth sacrificing everyhing else for.  And when the Buddha was being tempted under the Bo Tree, Maya the God of Illusion tried to distract him with Fear (What we think is so, and therefore binding) and Desire (what we want).  All the complexity comes from a simple set of constraints and conditions.

https://www.fairmormon.org/answers/Biblical_Keys_for_Discerning_True_and_False_Prophets/Seeing_the_truth

It turns out that there is a corrolation between a persons failure to perform the necessary sacrifices and the specific arguments they use to reject true prophets.  For example, "Have any of the rulers or of the pharisees believed on him?"  This is not one of the Biblical Tests for True and False prophets.  Rather, it rests on the supposition, the thinking, that if Jesus were a prophet, the rulers and pharisees would say so.  Another example, "There is Miciah the son of Imlah, but I hate him, for he propheseth of me not good, but evil."  Or and the young man left because he had much wealth...  "This is a hard saying? Who can hear it?"  
We heard him say tear down this temple, and he would raise it in three days.  Joseph Smith noticed that "the different teachers of religion understood the same passages of scripture so differently as to destroy all confidence in settling the question by an appeal to the Bible."

Notice that discerning by the fruits is not a matter of subjective taste (that is, not what I want, not what I think), but of knowing what sort of fruit goes on which plant.  Even a flawed fig points to a fig tree, whereas a perfect thorn or beautiful thistle is not a grape.  It's not even a question of if I like figs or grapes, but that I would recognize one if I saw one, even if it had blemishes or had been pecked by a bird.  That is why the Biblical tests could be helpful.

It was when I saw that relationship between the failure to offer the complete and ongoing sacrifice of a broken heart and a contrite spite and the specific arguments used that I realized why there is so little interest in the comprehensive list of Biblical Keys for discerning true and false prophets.  It is easier to get the answer you want if you use personalized tests and interpretations designed to get that answer.

And in all of this, it also helps to look up "Sustain" in a good dictionary.

Sustain96

1.  To keep up; keep going; maintain. Aid, assist, comfort.
2.  to supply as with food or provisions:
3.  to hold up; support
4.  to bear; endure
5.  to suffer; experience: to sustain a broken leg.
6.  to allow; admit; favor
7.  to agree with; confirm.

FWIW,

Kevin Christensen

Canonsburg, PA

 

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
3 hours ago, CV75 said:

From the context I take it that Presidents of the Church may receive personal revelation about future events in relation to what they need to do in behalf of the Church, and may not publish them, may share them with a few, may keep them in their personal journals, etc. Evidently Joseph was figuring out the wisdom of how much to share and how broadly in relation to what he actually needed to get done as President. The revelation didn't have a time frame for fulfillment (we live under a few of these now!). I don't know anyone who has shared their personal revelations about future events, and I think I would be careful myself, and would rather keep an eye out for the signs of the times of fulfillment in order to prepare accordingly, and be open to other revelations that perhaps require more immediate attention and action.

You may be right. But, what is challenging about this is that if we’re asked to believe something that we don’t know if it ever happens.

Share this post


Link to post
1 hour ago, Anonymous Mormon said:

SoMo,

I don't think people are feeling defensive as much as frustrated. You started this thread by asking a legitimate question and then every time someone has given you an answer that they feel is equally legitimate you have shot it down and told them they are wrong and their answer wasn't good enough.

Watching you manage this thread is like watching the Gospel Doctrine teacher get up and ask a question and get perfectly valid responses. But instead of recognizing the response as valid they shoot it down because it isn't the response they want because it doesn't tie into the point they wanted to make in the lesson. But in the mean time, it leaves the rest of the class frustrated and not wanting to participate, because their responses were valid but just didn't match the teacher's goal.

I feel like you already know the answer to your question - in your view there is only a single instance in Mormon history that would qualify as prophecy and everything else is just good intentions, good guesses, and hopeful wishing.

I am not really sure of what else you want from the rest of us in this thread? I don't think any of us can come up with other examples that meet your expectations and definition of prophecy and when we try we are told we are wrong.

I see what you’re saying. Thanks for pointing it out.

My perception is that some people instead of answering the question directly and saying “there really aren’t that many at all!”, the responses seem to redirect my question as if my question is not valid.  As if I need to reframe my expectations.  One respondent mocked the question asking if I expected a fortune teller (instead of a prophet).

I completely understand that the LDS and other definitions of a prophet are more encompassing. Let’s stick to the one topic instead of swerving the topic to other great things these men do besides predict the future.

Share this post


Link to post
36 minutes ago, why me said:

Well, let me put it this way. The church was out front in seeing the dangers of porn on family life because of its addiction. It may be true that some churches did at first see porn as a sin. However, it was the lds church that held firm in seeing the dangers of it. And warned lds members of its dangers. Also, many ex lds mocked the lds because of its stance on porn. But the lds church was proven right. Prohibition was ended and the church held firm. They were out front of it. Likewise for tobacco. If more people were lds they would be much healthier and family life would be less violent. The word of wisdom is fast becoming embraced by many people who want a healthier lifestyle, especially the part that recommends to eat meat sparingly .

I’d check your facts and dates to make sure you are right about those things.  I’m not as sure as you are of those things.

Share this post


Link to post
Posted (edited)
1 hour ago, SouthernMo said:

You may be right. But, what is challenging about this is that if we’re asked to believe something that we don’t know if it ever happens.

This can be said for all the prophecies about the signs of the times, Second Coming, etc. in tht we don't know these things will happen, or when. We must take the Gospel (and its truth being knowledge of things past, present and future) in faith, whether the event or revelation concerns the past, present or future. Prophecy can also be seen as a reverse form of history, and we know how controvertible the subject of history is!

I personally have a series of foreseen events that were fulfilled years (in two cases decades) later, but I shared them just as infrequently before their fulfillment as I did after. I wrote them down when I received them, so my posterity can look back and hopefully appreciate this miracle.

Edited by CV75

Share this post


Link to post
1 hour ago, SouthernMo said:

I see what you’re saying. Thanks for pointing it out.

My perception is that some people instead of answering the question directly and saying “there really aren’t that many at all!”, the responses seem to redirect my question as if my question is not valid.  As if I need to reframe my expectations.  One respondent mocked the question asking if I expected a fortune teller (instead of a prophet).

I completely understand that the LDS and other definitions of a prophet are more encompassing. Let’s stick to the one topic instead of swerving the topic to other great things these men do besides predict the future.

I provided you an example of a compelling prophecy...no response.

Share this post


Link to post
1 hour ago, SouthernMo said:

I’d check your facts and dates to make sure you are right about those things.  I’m not as sure as you are of those things.

When the word of wisdom was given, the norm was hunting meat, drinking coffee, and smoking or chewing tobacco and drinking alcohol. It must have been a sacrifice for the members to stop doing these things.

"The Word of Wisdom: D&C 89," Revelations in Context on history.lds.org (11 June 2013):

Nevertheless, it required time to wind down practices that were so deeply ingrained in family tradition and culture, especially when fermented beverages of all kinds were frequently used for medicinal purposes. The term “strong drink” certainly included distilled spirits like whiskey, which hereafter the Latter-day Saints generally shunned. They took a more moderate approach to milder alcoholic beverages like beer and “pure wine of the grape of the vine of your own make” (see D&C 89:6). For the next two generations, Latter-day Saint leaders taught the Word of Wisdom as a command from God, but they tolerated a variety of viewpoints on how strictly the commandment should be observed. This incubation period gave the Saints time to develop their own tradition of abstinence from habit-forming substances. By the early twentieth century, when scientific medicines were more widely available and temple attendance had become a more regular feature of Latter-day Saint worship, the Church was ready to accept a more exacting standard of observance that would eliminate problems like alcoholism from among the obedient. In 1921, the Lord inspired Church president Heber J. Grant to call on all Saints to live the Word of Wisdom to the letter by completely abstaining from all alcohol, coffee, tea, and tobacco. Today Church members are expected to live this higher standard.[1]

https://www.fairmormon.org/answers/Word_of_Wisdom/History_and_implementation#Revelations_in_Context:_.22Nevertheless.2C_it_required_time_to_wind_down_practices_that_were_so_deeply_ingrained_in_family_tradition_and_culture.22

Share this post


Link to post
33 minutes ago, CV75 said:

This can be said for all the prophecies about the signs of the times, Second Coming, etc. in tht we don't know these things will happen, or when. We must take the Gospel (and its truth being knowledge of things past, present and future) in faith, whether the event or revelation concerns the past, present or future. Prophecy can also be seen as a reverse form of history, and we know how controvertible the subject of history is!

I personally have a series of foreseen events that were fulfilled years (in two cases decades) later, but I shared them just as infrequently before their fulfillment as I did after. I wrote them down when I received them, so my posterity can look back and hopefully appreciate this miracle.

That’s awesome. Glad you’re having good experiences. 

Share this post


Link to post
30 minutes ago, let’s roll said:

I provided you an example of a compelling prophecy...no response.

You’re taking about President Kimball spinning a globe?  I can kind of see what you’re saying, but the church was behind that drive. I put that in the same category of when I was 18 I “prophesied” that I would graduate from college.  Lo and behold I did.  It was an action I undertook.

That example you shared of a future event being foretold seems to be helpful and faith building to you. Doesn’t resonate as special to me. People all over the world set goals and achieve them.

Share this post


Link to post
Posted (edited)
39 minutes ago, why me said:

When the word of wisdom was given, the norm was hunting meat, drinking coffee, and smoking or chewing tobacco and drinking alcohol. It must have been a sacrifice for the members to stop doing these things.

"The Word of Wisdom: D&C 89," Revelations in Context on history.lds.org (11 June 2013):

Nevertheless, it required time to wind down practices that were so deeply ingrained in family tradition and culture, especially when fermented beverages of all kinds were frequently used for medicinal purposes. The term “strong drink” certainly included distilled spirits like whiskey, which hereafter the Latter-day Saints generally shunned. They took a more moderate approach to milder alcoholic beverages like beer and “pure wine of the grape of the vine of your own make” (see D&C 89:6). For the next two generations, Latter-day Saint leaders taught the Word of Wisdom as a command from God, but they tolerated a variety of viewpoints on how strictly the commandment should be observed. This incubation period gave the Saints time to develop their own tradition of abstinence from habit-forming substances. By the early twentieth century, when scientific medicines were more widely available and temple attendance had become a more regular feature of Latter-day Saint worship, the Church was ready to accept a more exacting standard of observance that would eliminate problems like alcoholism from among the obedient. In 1921, the Lord inspired Church president Heber J. Grant to call on all Saints to live the Word of Wisdom to the letter by completely abstaining from all alcohol, coffee, tea, and tobacco. Today Church members are expected to live this higher standard.[1]

https://www.fairmormon.org/answers/Word_of_Wisdom/History_and_implementation#Revelations_in_Context:_.22Nevertheless.2C_it_required_time_to_wind_down_practices_that_were_so_deeply_ingrained_in_family_tradition_and_culture.22

Sure it must have been a sacrifice!  You and I don’t disagree with each other on that.  It appears our disagreement is around whether others before Joseph’s time knew of the ill effects of those things. My conclusion is that the evidence leans strongly toward the fact that many movements had already begun to warn of the ills of tobacco and hard liquor.

Coffee and tea?  I don’t know of any group besides the Mormons that have banned those substances. Maybe evidence will one day come forward about how bad those things are for us. I know there is some, but no more compelling than evidence against fatty foods, high salt or sugar contents, etc (health issues not addressed by the word of wisdom).

You bring up a very good point about meat. I have not been able to uncover any group (besides Buddhism and some eastern faiths, whose reasons are very different) who encouraged less consumption of meat. That honestly could be very prophetic!  Nutritionists are fairly united in their science behind humans doing better consuming far less meat.  But, it’s too bad our current leaders interpretation of the word of wisdom (so far as temple worthy goes) ignore much of what was revealed in section 89.   This leads me to believe that our prophets today have revelation telling us that a bacon-based diet is more righteous than someone taking a sip of green tea.

Edited by SouthernMo

Share this post


Link to post

You analogy might be more apt if you had said that as a U.S. citizen in 1973 you prophesied you would graduate from the University of Moscow.  

Seeing President Kimball’s prophecy unfold from the perspective of 2019 global politics and global Church membership of 16+ million is impressive.  Understanding it in the context of 1973 global politics and a mountain west centric Church with 3 million members qualifies as miraculous.

Apart from the audacious vision of a tiny Church to preach the gospel to the world, I feel God’s confirmation each time I watch the video, and it’s clear to me that the plan, and the message, are His.  

Prophecy reveals the will of God and how we can assist in bringing it about.  

Share this post


Link to post
10 minutes ago, let’s roll said:

You analogy might be more apt if you had said that as a U.S. citizen in 1973 you prophesied you would graduate from the University of Moscow.  

Seeing President Kimball’s prophecy unfold from the perspective of 2019 global politics and global Church membership of 16+ million is impressive.  Understanding it in the context of 1973 global politics and a mountain west centric Church with 3 million members qualifies as miraculous.

Apart from the audacious vision of a tiny Church to preach the gospel to the world, I feel God’s confirmation each time I watch the video, and it’s clear to me that the plan, and the message, are His.  

Prophecy reveals the will of God and how we can assist in bringing it about.  

That’s a good point!  I was born in the 80’s, so my memories and understanding of the implications of soviet communism and the impact of a divided world on missionary is quite limited. There have been global events that have changed that opened doors largely out of control to LDS leaders.

But, let’s acknowledge that in some countries, the permission to lead missionary efforts has gone backwards, and that there are some areas of the world we aren’t quite able to teach in yet (for a perfect fulfillment of President Kimball’s prophecy). But, time will tell.

Share this post


Link to post
25 minutes ago, SouthernMo said:

Sure it must have been a sacrifice!  You and I don’t disagree with each other on that.  It appears our disagreement is around whether others before Joseph’s time knew of the ill effects of those things. My conclusion is that the evidence leans strongly toward the fact that many movements had already begun to warn of the ills of tobacco and hard liquor.

Coffee and tea?  I don’t know of any group besides the Mormons that have banned those substances. Maybe evidence will one day come forward about how bad those things are for us. I know there is some, but no more compelling than evidence against fatty foods, high salt or sugar contents, etc (health issues not addressed by the word of wisdom).

You bring up a very good point about meat. I have not been able to uncover any group (besides Buddhism and some eastern faiths, whose reasons are very different) who encouraged less consumption of meat. That honestly could be very prophetic!  Nutritionists are fairly united in their science behind humans doing better consuming far less meat.  But, it’s too bad our current leaders interpretation of the word of wisdom (so far as temple worthy goes) ignore much of what was revealed in section 89.   This leads me to believe that our prophets today have revelation telling us that a bacon-based diet is more righteous than someone taking a sip of green tea.

A slice of bacon never hurt anybody. It is quite amazing really that country people would be up on the latest trends. If so, Joseph Smith was an absolute young genius. The year was 1833 and Joseph was 28. Not bad.

Share this post


Link to post
Posted (edited)
2 hours ago, why me said:

A slice of bacon never hurt anybody. It is quite amazing really that country people would be up on the latest trends. If so, Joseph Smith was an absolute young genius. The year was 1833 and Joseph was 28. Not bad.

Few things:

A sip of tea never hurt anybody. One cigarette never hurt anybody. One beer never hurt anybody.  Etc... One of anything advised against by the WoW as revealed in section 89 probably will not make much of an impact on one’s health. I’m making the comparison that if the WoW was only about heath, it’s teaching today is pretty hypocritical (at worst), or incomplete (at best).

There are a number of LDS scholars who have studied the temperance movement (as it relates to hard liquor and tobacco). Documents show that around Kirtland in the 1830s, the movement was quite strong and well known. My understanding of the context of Joseph Smith’s revelation on the word of wisdom would be somewhat akin to me “revealing” today that exercise is good for you and that God wants his children to do it.

Edited by SouthernMo

Share this post


Link to post
1 hour ago, SouthernMo said:

That’s a good point!  I was born in the 80’s, so my memories and understanding of the implications of soviet communism and the impact of a divided world on missionary is quite limited. There have been global events that have changed that opened doors largely out of control to LDS leaders.

But, let’s acknowledge that in some countries, the permission to lead missionary efforts has gone backwards, and that there are some areas of the world we aren’t quite able to teach in yet (for a perfect fulfillment of President Kimball’s prophecy). But, time will tell.

Your recent posts have demonstrated to me that your self-professed “quite limited” understanding goes far beyond the implications of soviet communism.  

You ask for examples of prophecy, then demean the prophecy deeming it as nothing more than a simple plan completely under the Church’s control (despite the fact the plan included preaching in lands closed to Americans and their churches, with a missionary force from lands the Church either wasn’t  in or in which it had few members).  And then further demean the prophecy by saying the Church simply executed on its commonplace plan (like your plan to graduate college) without providing any example of a comparable plan executed by a church of comparable size in the same time period.

Inexplicably, in your next post you further demean the prophecy by saying global events outside of the Church’s control opened doors for the expansion of missionary work.  Isn’t that part of the prophetic nature of what President Kimball said?  Isn’t it extraordinary and prophetic to announce that the Church will preach the Gospel in lands closed to the Church (especially if, in fact, opening those countries to missionary work was, as you believe, outside the control of the Church).

But, of course, opening those countries was not beyond the control of God.  And when God shared His plan with His prophet and told him to tell the Church that “the time is now,” the Prophet did so and the Church responded.  I invite you to look at the percentage increase in the missionary force in the two years after the prophecy was given and God opened countries to those missionaries.

Btw, I’d suggest that the idea that a single cigarette never hurt anyone is just wrongheaded since anyone includes people who have promised God not to smoke and breaking promises made to God always hurts the offender.

Share this post


Link to post

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Sign in to follow this  
×
×
  • Create New...