Jump to content
Seriously No Politics ×

"Other announcements" Pres. Nelson


Recommended Posts

10 hours ago, rockpond said:

And there's the issue...

The teaching is "make no mistake" each member is required to follow the First Presidency and "don't hesitate" to follow the counsel of the authorities of the church, no matter what it is.

Then, when we are able to look back and see that what they taught wasn't correct, wasn't the revealed will of God, then the response is:  "they are fallible men, why did you trust them over getting your own spiritual confirmation".

Each of us will have to make our choice.

Link to comment
7 hours ago, Bernard Gui said:

Each of us will have to make our choice.

I agree. 

But in my opinion, the natural man is such that the hazard is far greater that we will let individual pride hinder us from hearkening to divine instruction as conveyed through prophecy and revelation than it is that we will unwittingly follow divinely called servants of God into paths of error. 

Edited by Scott Lloyd
Link to comment
7 hours ago, Bernard Gui said:

Each of us will have to make our choice.

You're right.  And that applies to every statement and teaching that comes from our leaders.  Each of us should ponder and pray about it and then according to our own inspiration, decide if we believe it's correct.  

I do feel strongly that even if we disagree at times (which is fine), we should realize that this is our own inspiration for ourselves and not speak out publicly against our leaders.  It's fine to give our opinions in conversation (at times, depending on the circumstances).  We can also disagree with a teaching and make sure we do not speak ill of the leaders.

Edited by ALarson
Link to comment
3 minutes ago, ALarson said:

You're right.  And that applies to every statement and teaching that comes from our leaders.  Each of us should ponder and pray about it and then according to our own inspiration, decide if we believe it's correct.  

 

I don’t dispute this. At the same time I believe many people, by continually hearkening  to the words of the Lord, receive a spiritual gift such that they don’t always need a protracted period of pondering and praying about this or that matter that comes to us through prophecy and revelation, that in most cases they can recognize instantly or almost instantly that it is of God. 

 

 

Link to comment
6 minutes ago, Scott Lloyd said:

I don’t dispute this. At the same time I believe many people, by continually hearkening  to the words of the Lord, receive a spiritual gift such that they don’t always need a protracted period of pondering and praying about this or that matter that comes to us through prophecy and revelation, that in most cases they can recognize instantly or almost instantly that it is of God. 

I agree.  However there is a difference between hearkening to the words of the Lord and hearkening to the words of men (even good men).  And that's the important thing to remember.  We each can have direct communication with the Lord and receive our own inspiration.  Of course we can make mistakes in judgement and opinion just as the church leaders can at times.  

There does seem to be a variety of opinions here too regarding how to determine when a man is speaking as a Prophet vs when he is speaking as a man.  It definitely is easier to do that in hindsight....it's common to hear "well, he was just speaking as a man" when a past Prophet spoke or taught in error.  But at the time, it many times appears just as any other time our leaders are speaking to us.  That's why it's important to pray and determine for ourselves, IMO.

Edited by ALarson
Link to comment
8 hours ago, Scott Lloyd said:

I think President Nelson has spoken about his own experience. I also believe apostles who work closely with him can and do receive revelation on their own regarding the same matters on which the Church president has received revelation. It is not hearsay when they themselves are bearing witness of what they themselves have experienced.

Some people want to see it codified in a addendum to the Doctrine and Covenants, I think.  As if that would make it more genuine.

Link to comment
12 minutes ago, Stargazer said:

Some people want to see it codified in a addendum to the Doctrine and Covenants, I think.  As if that would make it more genuine.

I think members listen for something to be declared a revelation from the living prophet himself.  I believe that's reasonable and understandable.  No one is claiming that Pres. Nelson does not receive inspiration and guidance (as we all are able to receive).  His stewardship is for the entire church, so he does receive inspiration in his calling as the Prophet.  I haven't seen anyone here dispute that (unless I missed some posts...).

Pres. Nelson is the first Prophet for some time that likes to use the word "revelation" at times regarding changes or teachings or policies, but he is still not specific about which of his teachings or changes are actually a revelation.  So no one really knows (members) and we can discuss and discuss, but many will still disagree.  IIRC, the only change that was actually termed a revelation was the policy regarding SSM....but then it was almost immediately altered and now even walked back and changed more.  And the living Prophet at that time did not declare it a revelation.

Can you think of any other new revelation (that was specifically called a revelation)?

Edited by ALarson
Link to comment
15 minutes ago, Stargazer said:

Some people want to see it codified in a addendum to the Doctrine and Covenants, I think.  As if that would make it more genuine.

Yes. If the Church were to follow their preferred model for the form each and every revelation should take, the Doctrine and Covenants would comprise scores of separate volumes by now. And I fear they would still be cherry picking what they do and do not regard as revelation. 

Edited by Scott Lloyd
Link to comment
4 minutes ago, ALarson said:

Can you think of any other new revelation (that was specifically called a revelation)?

Nothing comes to mind, actually.  Maybe because I haven't been paying all that much attention, having my own fish to fry at the moment.

Link to comment
22 minutes ago, Stargazer said:

Some people want to see it codified in a addendum to the Doctrine and Covenants, I think.  As if that would make it more genuine.

Yeah... it is crazy to think current prophets might add to the Doctrine and Covenants like past prophets did!

Link to comment
1 minute ago, rockpond said:

Yeah... it is crazy to think current prophets might add to the Doctrine and Covenants like past prophets did!

Or use the seerstones, or experience what happened in the Kirtland temple, or get immediate revelation for the smallest things. But that was during the beginning days of the church's restoration. I guess we don't need it? 😕

Link to comment
58 minutes ago, ALarson said:

We can also disagree with a teaching and make sure we do not speak ill of the leaders.

Such as the new policy of no weapons on Church grounds.  We may not understand the reasons yet.  But the Lord sustains the prophet. We covenant to do the same.  It is okay to doubt, question and seek personal understanding.  “I would exhort you that ye would ask God, the Eternal Father, in the name of Christ, if these things are not true;”.  I believe if we are sincere, we can receive personal revelation on the subject.  Until then, as Bro. Gui said, we have a choice to make.   

Link to comment
2 minutes ago, Meerkat said:

Such as the new policy of no weapons on Church grounds.  We may not understand the reasons yet.  But the Lord sustains the prophet. We covenant to do the same.  It is okay to doubt, question and seek personal understanding.  “I would exhort you that ye would ask God, the Eternal Father, in the name of Christ, if these things are not true;”.  I believe if we are sincere, we can receive personal revelation on the subject.  Until then, as Bro. Gui said, we have a choice to make.   

Exactly.  Some will continue to carry weapons to church because they feel inspired to do so and they disagree with this new policy.  I don't feel strongly one way or the other....

Edited by ALarson
Link to comment
1 hour ago, ALarson said:

You're right.  And that applies to every statement and teaching that comes from our leaders.  Each of us should ponder and pray about it and then according to our own inspiration, decide if we believe it's correct.  

I do feel strongly that even if we disagree at times (which is fine), we should realize that this is our own inspiration for ourselves and not speak out publicly against our leaders.  It's fine to give our opinions in conversation (at times, depending on the circumstances).  We can also disagree with a teaching and make sure we do not speak ill of the leaders.

I don’t feel the need to question every statement and teaching they make. I have a few other things that I have to do. :)

But I get your point. I also agree that public and private criticism are unwarranted.

Link to comment
3 hours ago, Tacenda said:

Or use the seerstones, or experience what happened in the Kirtland temple, or get immediate revelation for the smallest things. But that was during the beginning days of the church's restoration. I guess we don't need it? 😕

We can have those kinds of experiences all the time if we wish.

Edited by Bernard Gui
Link to comment
5 minutes ago, Bernard Gui said:

I don’t feel the need to question every statement and teaching they make

And there again is the choice we each have.  Others feel differently and do ask questions or pray about new policies and teachings.

I think either is fine and we each should do what we believe is right for us to do 👍

Link to comment
8 minutes ago, Bernard Gui said:

We can have those experiences all the time if we wish.

Use a seerstone? :) 

But yes, we each can have our own personal revelations and inspiration.  However, we have not seen any revelations specifically recorded by our leaders and added to scripture.  That's the difference and I think what Tacenda may have been referring to (but she can speak for herself).  

I do wonder if those times are gone now though....where a revelation is officially printed as a declared revelation, and then added to our scriptures.  It's been years since that has happened.

Edited by ALarson
Link to comment
12 minutes ago, ALarson said:

Use a seerstone? :) 

But yes, we each can have our own personal revelations and inspiration.  However, we have not seen any revelations specifically recorded by our leaders and added to scripture.  That's the difference and I think what Tacenda may have been referring to (but she can speak for herself).  

I do wonder if those times are gone now though....where a revelation is officially printed as a declared revelation, and then added to our scriptures.  It's been years since that has happened.

Yeah, I don't foresee any more additions to our scriptures until OD3.  Based on what we've been taught by the prophet and apostles over the past couple years, the revelation received by them seems to fall into two categories.

1.  Q12 and FP counseling together over time then as unanimity among them is reached, it is considered to be the will of the Lord.  This type of revelation generally seems to be for changes/updates to curriculum, policy, and organization.

2.  Prophet wakes up with a thought.

There could be others -- I'm just not aware of those being discussed publicly.

The revelations described by #1 above, generally get shared through news releases and sometimes general conference.  They are printed in private letters to church leaders and the handbook.

Link to comment
18 minutes ago, ALarson said:

Use a seerstone? :) 

But yes, we each can have our own personal revelations and inspiration.  However, we have not seen any revelations specifically recorded by our leaders and added to scripture.  That's the difference and I think what Tacenda may have been referring to (but she can speak for herself).  

I do wonder if those times are gone now though....where a revelation is officially printed as a declared revelation, and then added to our scriptures.  It's been years since that has happened.

Thanks ALarsen, I was referring to the revelations that quickly answered questions about the church or restoration in the D&C that Joseph received. And wouldn't it be nice if the current prophet used the seerstone to get unanswered questions that many apologists are trying to figure out answers for, such as the location of the BoM lands, and the BoA being literal or through revelation.

Link to comment
4 minutes ago, rockpond said:

Yeah, I don't foresee any more additions to our scriptures until OD3.  Based on what we've been taught by the prophet and apostles over the past couple years, the revelation received by them seems to fall into two categories.

1.  Q12 and FP counseling together over time then as unanimity among them is reached, it is considered to be the will of the Lord.  This type of revelation generally seems to be for changes/updates to curriculum, policy, and organization.

2.  Prophet wakes up with a thought.

There could be others -- I'm just not aware of those being discussed publicly.

The revelations described by #1 above, generally get shared through news releases and sometimes general conference.  They are printed in private letters to church leaders and the handbook.

Yes....and they get altered, changed and walked back too ;)

Link to comment
Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...