What is a Seer?

[nicolasconnault]

You have not given me a specific prophecy but generalities.

1. A prophecy IS about a future event as described in the dictionary and defined by theologians worldwide.

2. OK. Name ONE prophecy that HAS been shared with the Church in the last 30 years. I'm OK with the ones that are too sacred to be shared.

3. OK. Illustrate ONE that was needed and given.

You ask me to believe your statements but they are unsubstantiated. I gave you: Moses. Joseph Smith (Section 130) and even mentioned E.T. Benson, accompanied by video. What do you shave to show us besides your interpretations. Is there or isn't there a prophecy in the last 30 years? Yes or No? If Yes, name one. If no, then it's no. Which is it?

You must have missed this post.

I don't care what the dictionary or theologians say about prophecy. As shown by previous posters, in LDS scriptures prophecy has a more extended meaning, which includes knowledge about the past, present and future. You also seem to think that if the prophecy is not about a very distant event (at least 10 years or so), it is not really a prophecy because it could have been guessed. I challenge that view, if such is yours.

[O-Brother]

O-Brother's version of a prophecy:

1. Is something totally new never predicted before
2. Is a prediction about a future event
3. Is only valid if given by the President of the Church. His counselors and the 12 apostles don't count

If this is your version of prophecy, then I don't know any that has been given verbatim to the entire Church (which is probably the only way you would know about it). Are you satisfied?

You didn't answer the question of the post and now you're beating around the bush.

1. A prophecy is a foretelling of a future event, therefore it's NEW by definition.

2. Correct. But you have given me none.

3. Where did I say that?

Edited: Yes, you don't know because there hasn't been any. It's very simple.

[nicolasconnault]

Here is more reading on the LDS meaning of prophecy:

A prophecy consists of divinely inspired words or writings, which a person receives through revelation from the Holy Ghost. The testimony of Jesus is the spirit of prophecy (Rev. 19: 10). A prophecy may pertain to the past, present, or future. When a person prophesies, he speaks or writes that which God wants him to know, for his own good or the good of others. Individuals may receive prophecy or revelation for their own lives

Would God that all the Lord

[nicolasconnault]

You didn't answer the question of the post and now you're beating around the bush.

1. A prophecy is a foretelling of a future event, therefore it's NEW by definition.

2. Correct. But you have given me none.

3. Where did I say that?

Dude, you're blowing smoke. Simply answer the question I've asked a billion times: Where is the prophecy in the last 30 years?

Note that I have given you an example of prophecy, I assume that you haven't read it yet.

Regarding your item 1: Do you mean that the prophecy must not have been given by anyone before? Why is that a requirement?

[nicolasconnault]

I will save you the trouble of re-reading past posts. In this post I gave an example of a prophecy given by President Faust in 1999, which fits your narrow definition of prophecy. I will continue to assume that you haven't read it.

[O-Brother]

You must have missed this post.

I don't care what the dictionary or theologians say about prophecy. As shown by previous posters, in LDS scriptures prophecy has a more extended meaning, which includes knowledge about the past, present and future. You also seem to think that if the prophecy is not about a very distant event (at least 10 years or so), it is not really a prophecy because it could have been guessed. I challenge that view, if such is yours.

Well, that's part of your confusion right there and others who agree with you. You mention knowledge about the future but you fail to give me one single example of such knowledge. By definition by the entire world of scholars out there, including many of our own - I can quote you examples if you would like - a prophecy is ALL ABOUT a future event yet you want to turn the meaning of the word prophecy into a current event. Makes no sense whatsoever if you ask me.

[nicolasconnault]

dum dee dum dum... Now you have quoted my post, but you still haven't read it...

[O-Brother]

I will save you the trouble of re-reading past posts. In this post I gave an example of a prophecy given by President Faust in 1999, which fits your narrow definition of prophecy. I will continue to assume that you haven't read it.

OK> Let me revisit that. Too many replies. If you are right. I will give that to you. Let me read it in detail.

[mercyngrace]

in which Elder Hinckley predicts... the internet?

[O-Brother]

I will save you the trouble of re-reading past posts. In this post I gave an example of a prophecy given by President Faust in 1999, which fits your narrow definition of prophecy. I will continue to assume that you haven't read it.

You've got to be kidding! The Y2K design flaw an example of prophecy? When JEFaust said nothing would happen to computers, there were roommates in colleges all over the world who had an "intuition" that nothing would happen. As well as many computer scientists. Sorry, that was not Prophecy but a personal opinion. I also knew nothing would happen.

Now show us a real, meaningful prophecy.

[Facsimile 3]

"Prophesy Smith! Ya, give us one of your revelations."

[nicolasconnault]

I think that an important point many are missing is that prophecies about global events are not as needed as prophecies about local ones. The apostles travel much, and they visit various parts of the world in which they do make prophetic statements. These, however, are not necessarily recorded nor published by the Church.

I remember that, during my mission in the England London Mission (1997-1999), 6 different apostles came to visit. Several of them made remarkable prophecies about the growth of the Church in England. One in particular (Elder Eyring I think) said that the growth in South and Central America was like a "drop in a bucket" compared to what was coming in the British Isles. This same prophetic message was repeated by several of the apostles. As far as I know, it hasn't yet been entirely fulfilled.

This was not published by the Church, nor was it spoken in General Conference. Why would it? Should the prophet spend a few hours at each general conference going through all the prophecies he or the other apostles have received concerning each of the 160+ countries in which the Church is established?

[nicolasconnault]

You've got to be kidding! The Y2K design flaw an example of prophecy? When JEFaust said nothing would happen to computers, there were roommates in colleges all over the world who had an "intuition" that nothing would happen. As well as many computer scientists. Sorry, that was not Prophecy but a personal opinion. I also knew nothing would happen.

Now show us a real, meaningful prophecy.

Oh so now we have two additional requirements to the O-Brother version of prophecy:

1. It must have total surprise and shock value: no one in the entire world must have guessed or had any intuition about it
2. It has to be "meaningful". Would you care to define that?

[O-Brother]

in which Elder Hinckley predicts... the internet?

No. Predictions about the Internet date back to 1934 and 1967.

Paul Otlet

[mercyngrace]

No. Predictions about the Internet date back to 1934 and 1967.

Paul Otlet

The seer! Paul Otlet! the seer!

[O-Brother]

Oh so now we have two additional requirements to the O-Brother version of prophecy:

1. It must have total surprise and shock value: no one in the entire world must have guessed or had any intuition about it
2. It has to be "meaningful". Would you care to define that?

Are you replying or trying to gain sympathy towards your responses? Where did I say 1 and 2 above?

1. Millions of people doubted the Y2k computer design flaw would have any impact. Millions disagreed. Not sure why you called that talk "prophecy"

2. All prophecies are meaningful. Defined as: full of meaning, significance, purpose, or value; purposeful;

What possible "spiritual" purpose would knowing that the y2k flaw wouldn't affect computers? How would that affect my salvation?

OK. I think I'm satisfied that you have no substantiation for your side of the argument. Moving on.

[nicolasconnault]

The problem O-Brother, is that, even though some people guess it right, many people have no clue. In the example of the Y2K bug, many people in the world were very worried. Some even thought that the end of the world was coming. I'll take a prophet's word anytime over someone else's "intuition".

[O-Brother]

The seer! Paul Otlet! the seer!

Actually, not a seer. A visionary. No prophet since his prediction about the Internet had no bearing on the salvation of man.

[nicolasconnault]

Are you replying or trying to gain sympathy towards your responses? Where did I say 1 and 2 above?

1. Millions of people doubted the Y2k computer design flaw would have any impact. Millions disagreed. Not sure why you called that talk "prophecy"

2. All prophecies are meaningful. Defined as: full of meaning, significance, purpose, or value; purposeful;

What possible "spiritual" purpose would knowing that the y2k flaw wouldn't affect computers? How would that affect my salvation?

OK. I think I'm satisfied that you have no substantiation for your side of the argument. Moving on.

Right, let's agree to disagree on that one. I distinctly remember being excited at his prophecy when I heard it, but I guess it doesn't fit your definition.

Did you see my point about local prophecies?

[O-Brother]

Right, let's agree to disagree on that one. I distinctly remember being excited at his prophecy when I heard it, but I guess it doesn't fit your definition.

Did you see my point about local prophecies?

It doesn't fit anyone's definition, assuming an IQ of 100. In fact, attributing the Y2K bug to Faust as prophecy makes me worried. The Y2K bug had nothing to do with eternal purposes, the Gospel or salvation and Hinckley did not predict the Internet. At the time he gave that talk, there was already conversations in the Church about computerization and improvements in the Communications system of the Church, which Hinckley oversaw. A local prophecy is fine and I quoted you one from Joseph Smith, D&C 130.

Look, the fact is we have not had any prophecies for a long time and that's fine. It doesn't mean we won't have one this next Conference.

I think you know that:

1. A Prophet, prophesies.

2. A Seer sees

3. A Revelator reveals.

When that doesn't happen, maybe there is just nothing to say. The Lord determines when a prophecy is given. If none has been given, then the Lord knows best. Why He has not given us any new prophecies is either a reason to worry or rejoice. Only those in charge of the flock know what's flowing down from Heaven. I'm at the bottom of the stack so I have no clue and can only go by what I observe.

But remember this: where there is no vision, the people perish.

[O-Brother]

No way - he left before I edited my accidental post above to add a quote refuting the notion that every prophetic pronouncement must be accompanied with "Thus saith the Lord". I want O-Brother to read it!

Here it is again:

OK. I read that. Name a few prophecies that Brother Clark mentioned that did not require thus Saith The Lord. I want to see them. Thanks.

[mercyngrace]

OK. I read that. Name a few prophecies that Brother Clark mentioned that did not require thus Saith The Lord. I want to see them. Thanks.

Sorry, my access to the 1954 Church News is limited. But since President Clark was a prophet, seer, and revelator at the time he spoke those words, I'm going to take him at his word.

You can read the article I took the quote from here.

[nicolasconnault]

A local prophecy is fine and I quoted you one from Joseph Smith, D&C 130.

Yet you do not accept them, and keep saying that our prophets and seers have not received any prophecies: (see bolded parts in your quotes below)

Look, the fact is we have not had any prophecies for a long time and that's fine. It doesn't mean we won't have one this next Conference.

I have given you some examples of recent local prophecies. You ignored them.

When that doesn't happen, maybe there is just nothing to say. The Lord determines when a prophecy is given. If none has been given, then the Lord knows best. Why He has not given us any new prophecies is either a reason to worry or rejoice. Only those in charge of the flock know what's flowing down from Heaven. I'm at the bottom of the stack so I have no clue and can only go by what I observe.

But remember this: where there is no vision, the people perish.

The prophets have visions and they act upon them. You feel slighted because you're not "in" on them, and that's your choice, but that doesn't mean they don't receive them. Only those that have eyes but will not see, or have ears but will not hear, will perish despite the prophets' visions.

I'm curious though, do you have a specific prophecy in mind, which you'd like the brethren to prophesy about?

[CV75]

With all due respect to you and admiration actually. I like people who reason through things to come up with an answer instead of ignoring the issue at hand. Good job. Maybe it's my thick skull but all of the above reflects individual experience WITH the Church but not a specific, prophetic utterance by a Prophet, Seer & Revelator. I have had many spiritual experiences doing what you described above but none of those experiences turned me into a seer. If there have been no prophecies in the last 25 years, it's perfectly OK to say, no, we haven't had any prophecies only revelations in regards to the administration of the Church, perfecting of the saints and growth objectives. Let me break it down as follows, so it's more objective.

Spencer W. Kimball - Name one or two of his prophecies during his calling as a Prophet. ________________

Gordon B. Hinckley - ditto

Thomas S. Monson - ditto

Not counsel. Not advice. Not administrative utterances. But prophecies about future events, which is what prophecies are. I quoted you one from D&C 130 from Joseph Smith. I questioned your mentioning GBH's "growth of the Church" because that was nothing new and had been predicted before. He was just re-enforcing a known fact. Now it's your turn. IF NONE. Write none.

I did not intend the several examples I provided to show that members can have direct or vicarious experiences as prophets, seers and revelators (though I suppose they can within the scope of their stewardship, for example, gift of tongues = translating), but to show that 1 ) through Joseph Smith, the current head (Prophet, Seer and Revelator) of this dispensation we have the translation Book or Mormon, which is presented anew to many people, as well as the keys for promising future-oriented temple blessings; and 2 ) through President Monson, the mortal Prophet, Seer and revelator, we have presently active prophetic keys in the blessings of Abraham delivered anew to temple initiates every day, as well as a "machine" that delivers the Book of Mormon in many languages.

I understand you are looking for a D&C 130-like prediction. But we need to understand what it was, why it was given, what the membership and the world needs from the Church today, and what--in the midst of the grand fulfillment of ancient predictions--must now be predicted with such specificity? Until we can answer these questions, we cannot assess what we don't see today (which doesn't mean it doesn't exist) with what we might surmise from hindsight.

Why was this prediction given, or included in the D&C: Note that it is not included as a major point in the section heading. It seems to have very limited scope; I can only guess it was for the Prophet's personal benefit in understanding other matters of moving the church ahead, or helping him help those close to him understand (perhaps such things as the move West, or the need to otherwise stabilize the church). I don't know how far this was emphasized to the membership of his day outside of its publication in the D&C, or how this was discussed among general membership, and what general application their knowledge of this would have been required of the Lord. Such predictions are often for the benefit of those who have an interest in or witness their fulfillment many years later. In addition, with the speed at which events develop with modern technology, 29 years in Joseph's day (and he did not predict when it would happen, just that it would) is like 100+ years for our day.

It is reasonable to conclude the modern Presidents make predictions and write them down in their journals.

But all this aside, what would a modern Church President's similar prediction, in the last 170 years, look like, and why, and what real applicable meaning would it have?

"...the commencement of even more difficulties which will cause much bloodshed previous to the coming of the Son of Man will be in (name your location). It may probably arise through (Gadianton robber-like induced or greed-instigated economic turmoil). This a voice declared to me, while I was praying earnestly on the subject, December 21st, 2012."

[O-Brother]

I did not intend the several examples I provided to show that members can have direct or vicarious experiences as prophets, seers and revelators (though I suppose they can within the scope of their stewardship, for example, gift of tongues = translating), but to show that 1 ) through Joseph Smith, the current head (Prophet, Seer and Revelator) of this dispensation we have the translation Book or Mormon, which is presented anew to many people, as well as the keys for promising future-oriented temple blessings; and 2 ) through President Monson, the mortal Prophet, Seer and revelator, we have presently active prophetic keys in the blessings of Abraham delivered anew to temple initiates every day, as well as a "machine" that delivers the Book of Mormon in many languages.

And it shall come to pass afterward, that I will pour out my spirit upon all flesh; and your sons and your daughters shall prophesy, your old men shall dream dreams, your young men shall see visions. Joel 2:28.

I see what you're saying and how you're looking at things but being introduced to an existing doctrine or the Book of Mormon does not constitute prophecy. It's an introduction. Performing future ordinances or receiving future blessings are not prophecies for the body of the Church but benefits reserved for all those who play by the rules and receive blessings as a result. You're talking about mechanism and not prophecies.

You're trying to give the word "prophecy" a meaning that isn't there. Prophecy is, by definition, the foretelling of future events. If you're speaking of potential revelations and personal prophecies that you may receive while in the House of the Lord for yourself and your family, then that's a personal prophecy. The prophecy we have been speaking of are for the entire world or the entire Church, uttered by a Prophet, Seer & Revelator. All of us are entitled to personal revelation. Prophets, speak the will of the Lord for his people and sometimes for the entire world.

I understand you are looking for a D&C 130-like prediction. But we need to understand what it was, why it was given, what the membership and the world needs from the Church today, and what--in the midst of the grand fulfillment of ancient predictions--must now be predicted with such specificity? Until we can answer these questions, we cannot assess what we don't see today (which doesn't mean it doesn't exist) with what we might surmise from hindsight.

It's not necessarily what I'm looking for. It's the format. If the format has changed and I believe that there have been some talks about this issue, including the one that says, when the Prophet speaks, the debate is over and that may be true. But you'd think when Brigham Young spoke, the debate would be over as well since he too was a Prophet. Yet, the debate is still ongoing about him and his admonitions and prophecies, right? The fact remains, that, for the last 30 years, we have had no specific prophecies about future events. We've had a lot of well-thought out moral, spiritual and temporal counsel but so have other churches. Counsel is not prophecy. Now, it's possible that there has been no need for new prophecies but simply revelations about administrative issues, growth and expansion. The closest I've come to a prophecy as far as I can find, was Ezra Taft Benson's talk in the 50's, I think. Watch the initial video. That talk struck me as prophetic and what he described is actually taking place right now. The Bible may have predicted current political leader(s) and what t/he/y will do to this nation. Nostradamus may have predicted a few things as well. Guidance is not prophecy but it can be a fulfillment of a particular prophecy.

Why was this prediction given, or included in the D&C: Note that it is not included as a major point in the section heading. It seems to have very limited scope; I can only guess it was for the Prophet's personal benefit in understanding other matters of moving the church ahead, or helping him help those close to him understand (perhaps such things as the move West, or the need to otherwise stabilize the church). I don't know how far this was emphasized to the membership of his day outside of its publication in the D&C, or how this was discussed among general membership, and what general application their knowledge of this would have been required of the Lord. Such predictions are often for the benefit of those who have an interest in or witness their fulfillment many years later. In addition, with the speed at which events develop with modern technology, 29 years in Joseph's day (and he did not predict when it would happen, just that it would) is like 100+ years for our day.

Prophecies are never only for the Prophet's personal benefit unless it's a personal prophecy. The Lord will do nothing except he speaks through his servant(s) the Prophet(s). It's for the benefit of God's children.

D&C 130 talks about what would end up becoming the Civil War, obviously that was not for the Prophet's own benefit since so many people - non-Mormons- were involved.

Prophecies are not contingent on technology. They're given by the Spirit. You see, there is a tendency in Mormonism to add meaning to things we cannot accept or explain. There is also a tendency to ignore some pretty straight forward facts. Why we do that, I don't know. Maybe it's hard to say: "Come to think of it, there have been no specific official or unofficial prophecies in the last 40 years." My point is, it doesn't mean we're not guided by Prophets, Seers and Revelators. It only means we have had no prophecies and that's OK. A seer sees, reveals and prophesies. But only when The Lord sees it as expedient for him to do so.

Perhaps we're just living prior prophecies and no new prophecy will come until we have fulfilled the previous ones. Now that makes sense rather than trying to explain away why we haven't had any prophecies.

I have noticed that at some point here in our history, prophecies have ceased. Why? I don't know. I can speculate and that's about it.

It is reasonable to conclude the modern Presidents make predictions and write them down in their journals.

Yes, that's possible but not very useful.

But all this aside, what would a modern Church President's similar prediction, in the last 170 years, look like, and why, and what real applicable meaning would it have?

You learn the meaning once you have A prophecy to look at. Right now we have none. (New ones)

"...the commencement of even more difficulties which will cause much bloodshed previous to the coming of the Son of Man will be in (name your location). It may probably arise through (Gadianton robber-like

I am not sure I understand your last sentence. Even if you wrote the above, that's already been predicted 2,000 years ago by Jesus Himself.