Is the LDS Church really led by prophets?

[Cold Steel]

I am not suggesting that baptism is not a commandment. God tells us to get baptized. But that doesn't mean that it is a prerequisite for salvation. Nor does it make Mark 16:16 an authentic text of Scripture.

No, but if Joseph Smith was a prophet, we know that baptism is a prerequisite for salvation. If it wasn't essential, why would Christians be baptizing for the dead, a practice that was far more comprehensive than previously thought. The early church fathers also struggled over the Mark 16:16 passage and yet Protestants are so quick to dismiss it, believing that belief is enough. Yet Jesus was baptized and he told Nicodemus (John 3:3-5):

Jesus answered and said unto him, Verily, verily, I say unto thee, Except a man be born again, he cannot see the kingdom of God. Nicodemus saith unto him, How can a man be born when he is old? can he enter the second time into his mother's womb, and be born? Jesus answered, Verily, verily, I say unto thee, Except a man be born of water and of the Spirit, he cannot enter into the kingdom of God.

He was, of course, speaking of baptism, baptism of water and of the Spirit. There's also not a single example of anyone achieving salvation in the New Testament who wasn't baptized.

Again, you can argue with these issues point by point, but in the end, prophetic guidance is required to know for sure. Otherwise, you're just shooting in the dark. We Mormons know that the Millennium will be used to bind the living and the dead, turning the hearts of the children to the fathers.

If this is not true, then what is the purpose of the Millennium? Do you think we're going to all sit around and have family picnics for a thousand years? That it will be all play and no work?

I prefer to think the world will be dotted with temples and that all things will be brought together on Heaven and on Earth.

[ELF1024]

I am of the opinion that Mr. Bowman is not actually interested in discussion, so much as just knocking down whatever pins you attempt to setup for him. I would call this a simple matter of theological bowling...

I don't enjoy taking the time to setup the pins when someone is only interested in knocking them down without consideration.

[Black Moclips]

After reviewing all 9 pages of the thread so far, I have to congratulate Rob Bowman for his stamina in this thread. Agree with him or not, he makes the effort to respond to each person. And when its 10 on 1, thats a tough job.

I have to say that I see the point of the opening post. I understand what he is saying. Many times I've asked myself, "Where's the beef?" with respect to modern day revelation. I'm assured there is revelation and inspiration everywhere in the church, abounding in just about every decision that comes out of SLC, but personally, I don't see it. Of course, this could just be my personal problem. But I know other people see and feel the same way I do.

It would give my crumbling little spark of a testimony a huge burst of life to hear an apostle or prophet boldly claim in conference to speak the Lords words as Joseph did and end with a Thus saith the Lord. I know that makes me a weak, faithless, sign seeking apostate in sheeps clothing, but I would still love to see it.

[Black Moclips]

God hasn't gone away, He has just become more concerned with the administrative minutia of running a bureaucracy. It's not like there have been really important questions dividing mankind in the last 150 years. I mean, he gave us important information like the detecting of demons through handshakes. Things like when does life begin, human evolution, nuclear weapons, embryonic research, race, climate change, global economics and the like just don't raise to the level of God's interest.

That large bang was the sound of the hammer hitting the nail right on the head.

There are a lot of other things that could go on that list too.

[Mola Ram Suda Ram]

I feel like I'm at a fantasy convention: Mola Ram, Obiwan, Gandalf....maybe I would do better if I went by a name like Digory Kirke....

Sounds good, the mods can change your name. Lol.

[cinepro]

It would give my crumbling little spark of a testimony a huge burst of life to hear an apostle or prophet boldly claim in conference to speak the Lords words as Joseph did and end with a Thus saith the Lord.

Honestly, I don't think most LDS would know what to think if something like that happened. It'd be like "What did he say...?" They've worked for years to get LDS to the point that we don't expect it (and even get a little mad at people who suggest it might be possible), so I don't think they want to raise everyone's expectations by suddenly revealing new and interesting things, or translating ancient documents or something.

I mean really, if you were an Apostle, how would you like to be the guy who has to get up and speak after President Monson or another Apostle pours out new revelation, introduces new translations of ancient scripture, and tells us where the Book of Mormon took place. "Thank you for revealing the Book of Joseph, President Monson. I hadn't heard you were going to do that. My talk today is on family history...."

I know that makes me a weak, faithless, sign seeking apostate in sheeps clothing, but I would still love to see it.

Adulterer, too.

[Mola Ram Suda Ram]

Mola,

You wrote:

Please mount an argument from the Bible proving that I am not a prophet. No matter what you say, I can use the same argumentative strategy that you are using here: I can simply assert that the Bible never says a prophet can't be just like, well, me!

That is the point and thank you for making it. You just cut your own argument. The bible is silent on a large part so to me it is quite silly for you to claim some of the things you did.

I would need to judge you by your fruits Rob, if you claimed to be a prophet.

You wrote:

Well, you have conceded a "seniority" system once a man is made an apostle. I agree that there is no straight seniority system to reach that position of apostle, but the evidence does support the idea that men "work their way up the system." Let's take the current LDS Prophet-President, Thomas S. Monson. He was a bishop at age 22, a counselor to a stake president at age 27, a mission president at age 32, served on some LDS Church committees, and was called to be an apostle at age 36 (the youngest since Joseph Fielding Smith) in 1963. That sounds like he worked his way up the system. Nothing sinister is meant by this: he seems to have proven himself a very capable individual and from what I know a nice man. Then the seniority system becomes patently obvious: he advanced to Second Counselor in 1985, First Counselor in 1995, and now he's the President.

This does not look like he "worked his way throug the system" It looks as if he had held several callings that prepared him for his current calling.

Do you know what it takes to even be a bishop? You are crazy if you even aspire to be that.

There is no campaning to any office. He did not aspire to be called to any of those offices. As such you cannot claim that he worked his way up that latter. In essance he really had not control over it, other than to magnify his callings.

As I recall some of the other Apostles were mer stake presidents before they were called to the office.

[Mola Ram Suda Ram]

The fact is that for 15 prophets, seers and revelators, there's remarkably little (close to 0) prophecy, visions and revelations. While active I would jump through mental hoops double backwards to pretend this has no bearing, but now my vision has cleared, it seems ridiculously plain.

I see revelations happening at least (generally) every six months. They come at GC. That sure was a lot of mental gymantics I had to jump through.

What is ridiculously plain is that you have a skewed view of the LDS faith.

[yesucan2]

In another thread, Charles Dowis argued (as he often does) that orthodox Christianity made a serious mistake by replacing

[cinepro]

I see revelations happening at least (generally) every six months. They come at GC. That sure was a lot of mental gymantics I had to jump through.

What is ridiculously plain is that you have a skewed view of the LDS faith.

The trick isn't to see Jesus on a piece of toast. The trick is being able to tell the difference between a random pattern on the toast, an intentional pattern that has an "earthly" origin, and an intentional spiritual manifestation.

Depending on how our brains work and what you are expecting, it might take more mental gymnastics to not see Jesus on the toast, even if that is the more accurate presentation of the situation.

[Kevin Christensen]

I find the Biblical tests on this question more compelling than the arbitrary alternatives.

http://www.fairlds.org/Bible/prophettestsfv5.pdf

Also, for example, Boyd Packer in Conference in 1974, a talk I heard on my mission.

http://lds.org/ldsorg/v/index.jsp?hideNav=1&locale=0&sourceId=57403219c786b010VgnVCM1000004d82620a____&vgnextoid=2354fccf2b7db010VgnVCM1000004d82620aRCRD

Revelation continues in the Church: the prophet receiving it for the Church; the president for his stake, his mission, or his quorum; the bishop for his ward; the father for his family; the individual for himself.

Many revelations have been received and are found in evidence in the onrolling work of the Lord. Perhaps one day other revelations which have been received and have been recorded will be published, and we stand in expectation that

[Cold Steel]

Many times I've asked myself, "Where's the beef?" with respect to modern day revelation. I'm assured there is revelation and inspiration everywhere in the church, abounding in just about every decision that comes out of SLC, but personally, I don't see it. Of course, this could just be my personal problem. But I know other people see and feel the same way I do.

The beef is there in rich abundance, my friend. We can't expect every day to be filled with miraculous events and many times we look for the beef when it's all around us.

Today we're living in unprecedented peace and prosperity, but it won't last much longer. We've been told to be prepared and the church has been instructed to no longer preach it from the pulpit. We've been warned. Less than half the church will be prepared when peace and prosperity will be taken from us. And as a whirlwind it shall come upon the face of the earth -- and upon the Lord's House shall it begin and from the Lord's House it shall go forth." (D&C 112:23-26) The Lord states it will be "a day of wrath, a day of burning, a day of desolation, of weeping, of mourning, and of lamentation."

This means that whatever comes will come quickly and be devastating in its consequences. Peace will be taken from the earth and city will be against city and neighborhood against neighborhood. Then you'll see the full benefits of revelation and you'll want to be a part of the church. According to prophecy, the destructions and desolations of the past will be but a foretaste of what will come. The church doesn't expect more than fifty percent of the saints to be prepared, and as Elder Benson said, being prepared will be as important to us as boarding the arc was to Noah. The first part of the first section of the Doctrine & Covenants also presages this calamity that will come upon the earth. "Wherefore fear and tremble, O ye people, for what I the Lord have decreed...shall be fulfilled."

Why will all this happen?

"For they have strayed from mine ordinances, and have broken mine everlasting covenant. They seek not the Lord to establish his righteousness, but every man walketh in his own way, and after the image of his own god, whose image is in the likeness of the world, and whose substance is that of an idol, which waxeth old and shall perish in Babylon."

The term "Babylon" is referenced in relation to the last days in the book of Revelation.

It's great to be able to talk about the gospel and its ordinances, but the world lacks any other church that is linked directly to the Lord, with divine oversight. Every other church has gone after its own way and has interpreted the scriptures as it chooses. The early church fathers realized that baptism was an essential ordinance, and this led to such evils as infant baptism, predestination and many parts of the Westminster Confessions. Pristine truth comes only from pristine sources, and the Bible can be interpreted in so many ways that Man has shown an utter inability to do it correctly.

.

[Obiwan]

The fact is that for 15 prophets, seers and revelators, there's remarkably little (close to 0) prophecy, visions and revelations. While active I would jump through mental hoops double backwards to pretend this has no bearing, but now my vision has cleared, it seems ridiculously plain.

You are not the first who thinks his vision is now "clear" now having left the Church..... What you don't realize is that you've simply become more "blind" by prejudging things you simply don't understand, in this case how revelation, visions, etc. actually work and occur, they types and how often.

[Bernard Gui]

That large bang was the sound of the hammer hitting the nail right on the head.

There are a lot of other things that could go on that list too.

What is your evidence that God is not concerned?

That the leaders of the Church aren't concerned?

Except about global warming.

Bernard

[Bernard Gui]

I've long believed Sam Walton was guided by revelation from God in his founding and management of Wal-mart.

Having a very close friend who was intimately involved with the beginnings of the Perpetual Education Fund,

I strongly believe it was indeed a revealed program, and a darn good one at that.

Bernard

[zerinus]

zerinus,

The way we approach biblical texts is probably just too different for us to come an agreement on these things.

I dare say we do. The way you Evangelicals approach biblical texts is to distort it beyond recognition! I agree.

I am not suggesting that baptism is not a commandment. God tells us to get baptized. But that doesn't mean that it is a prerequisite for salvation.

And here is a case in point. All the commandments of God are required for salvation. If there are no consequences to breaking the commandment, what is the point of having the commandment in the first place? Perhaps you have forgotten these verses:

Matthew 7

:

21 Not every one that saith unto me, Lord, Lord, shall enter into the kingdom of heaven; but he that

doeth

the will of my Father which is in heaven.

22 Many will say to me in that day, Lord, Lord, have we not prophesied in thy name? and in thy name have cast out devils? and in thy name done many wonderful works?

23 And then will I profess unto them, I never knew you: depart from me, ye that

work iniquity

.

24 Therefore whosoever heareth these sayings of mine, and

doeth them,

I will liken him unto a wise man, which built his house upon a rock:

25 And the rain descended, and the floods came, and the winds blew, and beat upon that house; and it fell not: for it was founded upon a rock.

26 And every one that heareth these sayings of mine, and

doeth them not,

shall be likened unto a foolish man, which built his house upon the sand:

27 And the rain descended, and the floods came, and the winds blew, and beat upon that house; and it fell: and

great was the fall of it

.

28 And it came to pass, when Jesus had ended these sayings, the people were astonished at his doctrine:

29 For he taught them as one having authority, and not as the scribes.

What is the point of having commandments, if it makes no difference whether you keep them or not?

Nor does it make Mark 16:16 an authentic text of Scripture.

It is ironic -- and from my vantage point telling -- that Mormons make so much about the corruption of the biblical text, but they accept a text that is clearly corrupted while often raising suspicions about other texts for which we have no evidence of corruption.

[Brennin]

John Taylor's revelation calling Heber J. Grant and George Teasdale to the Twelve, Wilford Woodruff's revelations on sealings and on plural marriage, Lorenzo Snow's revelation on tithing, Joseph F. Smith's vision of the redemption of the dead, Spencer W. Kimball's revelation on priesthood, Gordon B. Hinckley's revelation on smaller temples -- off the top of my head, that's seven more revelations than mainstream Christendom received during the same post-Brigham period.

For the most part, you are grasping at straws. But Woodruff's revelation certainly counts. From it we learned that the God of the LDS Church changes his mind based on U.S. legislation.

[Brennin]

I dare say we do. The way you Evangelicals approach biblical texts is to distort it beyond recognition! I agree!

And here is a case in point. All the commandments of God are required for salvation. If there are no consequences to breaking the commandment, what is the point of having the commandment in the first place? Perhaps you have forgotten these scriptures:

Matthew 7

:

21 Not every one that saith unto me, Lord, Lord, shall enter into the kingdom of heaven; but he that

doeth

the will of my Father which is in heaven.

22 Many will say to me in that day, Lord, Lord, have we not prophesied in thy name? and in thy name have cast out devils? and in thy name done many wonderful works?

23 And then will I profess unto them, I never knew you: depart from me, ye that

work iniquity

.

24 Therefore whosoever heareth these sayings of mine, and

doeth them,

I will liken him unto a wise man, which built his house upon a rock:

25 And the rain descended, and the floods came, and the winds blew, and beat upon that house; and it fell not: for it was founded upon a rock.

26 And every one that heareth these sayings of mine, and

doeth them not,

shall be likened unto a foolish man, which built his house upon the sand:

27 And the rain descended, and the floods came, and the winds blew, and beat upon that house; and it fell: and

great was the fall of it

.

28 And it came to pass, when Jesus had ended these sayings, the people were astonished at his doctrine:

29 For he taught them as one having authority, and not as the scribes.

What is the point of having commandments, if it makes no difference whether you keep them or not?

[zerinus]

Thanks for the morning amusement. I especially enjoyed the magenta(?) but you forgot to post in ALL CAPS!!

Glad to be of service; but why should I post in ALL CAPS?

[cdowis]

But Woodruff's revelation certainly counts. From it we learned that the God of the LDS Church changes his mind based on U.S. legislation.

That is why we have living prophets. The government threatened to use it power, including the army, to destroy the church. He didn't "change his mind", but saved the church from extinction with his revelation to the prophet.

The principal is unchanged, only the practice. It is practiced today when a widower is sealed to a second wife in the temple, after his first wife is deceased. We also do not practice the United Order, but now pay tithing. The Lord leads the church through living prophets.

[cdowis]

Glad to be of service; but why should I post in ALL CAPS?

Why do you post in RED? It is very distracting and difficult to read.

[zerinus]

Why do you post in RED? It is very distracting and difficult to read.

That has been my style of posting for years, not just here but on other boards as well. Nobody had ever complained that it was unreadable though. You are the first one.

[cdowis]

That has been my style of posting for years, not just here but on other boards as well. Nobody had ever complained that it was unreadable though. You are the first one.

It is readable in the same way a post in all CAPS is readable. I remember someone who underlined everything in his post. Anyway, I think that is what Brennin was trying to say.

[Nathair/|\]

That has been my style of posting for years, not just here but on other boards as well. Nobody had ever complained that it was unreadable though. You are the first one.

I enjoy it. It's a nice change from the same old black and white. Just nobody steal my Druidic green.

Yours under the bored oaks,

Nathair /|\

[zerinus]

I enjoy it. It's a nice change from the same old black and white. Just nobody steal my Druidic green.

Yours under the bored oaks,

Nathair /|\

I stole your Druidic Green ages ago. I use three colors in my posts: Dark Red for my own compositions, Navy for scripture quotes, and Dark Green for non-scripture quotes. I have also used Purple and occasionally Teal in my posts.

I believe in style. It is the style that distinguishes the average from the exceptional. I also believe in consistency. You shouldn't keep changing your style. I think that what you say is nearly as important as how you say it!