A Serious Question About "Priesthood Power"

[keith_brian]

To give a child everything he wants or needs is the antithesis of truly loving the child IF you want that child to grow to be a productive and caring adult.

I for one NEVER give a priesthood blessing without stating "Thy will be done" somewhere in the blessing.

To me, this statement doesn't make a lot of sense. Could you please explain what you mean by it, perhaps by giving some example of instances when denying a person a "blessing" is beneficial and how the same benefit is impossible to obtain through an alternative means, especially given the presumed omnipotence and omniscience of God?

Perhaps kb might ask a priesthood holder to cut off an arm in his presence and then restore it to full function so that he might know of the power held. For those that believe no explanation is necessary,for those that don't,no explanation is sufficient.

Sounds good. A priesthood healing from an amputation would be a conclusive way to demonstrate the effectiveness of a given spiritual healing method.

Somehow, I am convinced that no priesthood healing of amputees exits. Does anyone have documented evidence refuting this stance?

To heal or be healed of some physical malady is a blessing ,but not a "top of the list" type of blessing. Those are to come to a knowledge of the Savior and be healed in and by the Spirit.

But, it seems to me to certainly be a blessing of physical health that would be beneficial to the person in question and one which I would assume that God, given his omnipotence and omniscience, would be able to provide. The fact that he willfully refuses this blessing to this person must be justified.

[Brian 2.0]

And so it is conditional on our asking? Then what of those who did ask but did not receive? And what does that say about the role of the priesthood if the blessing is contigent on our simply asking? I could have sworn it had something to do with the recipient's faith as well as the worthiness of the Priesthood holder. Your point seems to reduce this down to a predetermined number of times the Lord will answer in the affirmative as long as we just ask. Hmmmmm...

I don't understand what you're saying here.

I'm talking more at length and in depth about this on the "Rational thought is useless thread." it may make more sense over there.

[TAO]

Is there really power in priesthood?

To put it simply, yes, there is. There is a difference.

Now before anyone flames me for even asking such a question let me interject that I acknowledge the comfort, the reassurance, the peace that can come through a priesthood blessing. I have personally witnessed people in deep personal pain (anguish not physical pain) given great comfort through a male laying their hands on the head of an individual and calling down the power of God and stating words of comfort that express God’s love for that individual along with promises specific to the needs of that individual.

So in examples like this I do see value and power…to sooth a troubled heart.

What I am asking is actual power to heal or command God’s power in some other physical manner.

What you are asking about, is a miracle, my friend... and in order to have miracles, you must have faith.

What does the priesthood do? Let's read it:

"I am a son of God, and I bear the Aaronic Priesthood, which holds the keys to the ministering of angels, and to the gospel of repentance for the remission of sins. I will:

Become converted to the gospel of Jesus Christ and live its teachings.

Serve faithfully in priesthood callings, and fulfill the responsibilities of priesthood offices.

Give Meaningful Service.

Prepare and live worthily to receive the Melchizedek Priesthood and temple ordinances.

Prepare to serve an honorable full-time mission.

Obtain as much educations as possible.

Prepare to become a worthy husband and father.

Give proper respect to women, girls, and children."

So, an Aaronic priesthood holder has several duties, and obtains blessings for living worthily up to these duties, and performing them with his soul towards God.

It reminds me of a story I read in one of President Monson's books. You can read it in one of his talks here: http://lds.org/ldsor...a____&hideNav=1

It says, in that statement, that you hold the keys to the ministering of angels, and to the gospel of repentance for the remission of sins. Keys... that is what the priesthood is for... to act, in authority, directed by the will of God. It means you direct some of his power - he is lending it to you. So yes, the priesthood does make a difference. You are much more likely to receive a blessing if you have the priesthood, because if you have the priesthood, along with faith, you are acting in the authority of God, to do things that need to be done.

01. Recently a dear friend’s child was diagnosed with cancer. The local priesthood brethren give this child multiple priesthood blessings each promising her that she would be healed. Only after it became apparent that her cancer was extremely advanced did they reverse course and offer priesthood blessings to prepare her for the inevitable. She died after a long and valiant battle. And although her parents I’m sure found comfort in those latter blessing…the earlier blessing went unfulfilled.

My friend, did they say 'God, may she be helaed', or 'God please heal her'? That is asking, I believe. In any case, it is our duty to ask God whether or not something may be made possible, it is not our duty to force our will upon it, for then it will not work.

02. James E. Talmage, in a tragic farming accident, blinded his younger brother with a pitch fork. Years later as a member of the 12 Apostles, he and other members of the 12 gave a priesthood blessing promising a full restoration of his brothers sight (in this life). He died a blind man, the promised restoration unfulfilled.

I need a reference to this one. But also... it takes faith on the part of his brother, and the apostles, in order for the blessing to take affect. And it STILL has to be the will of God. Or else it will not happen. How do you know everyone had the faith required? In addition, are you sure he was talking about physical eyes, and not the way it is used in the scriptures to talk about spiritual blindness being turned into spiritual sight?

Ultimately, I don't think we can know these things, so I wouldn't be troubled over it, and leave it to the Lord.

I’m sure there are hundreds of examples where priesthood power has failed to produce the promised blessings. Yet IF the desired outcome occurs…in other words if medical science produces the desired result…priesthood power gets the credit. And if the priesthood promise is not fulfilled then the default answer is that that was God’s will.

I remember Brigham Young saying something to the effect that you aren't supposed to just use a blessing in faith, if you are able to do more; you are supposed to do all you can do medically and use a blessing in faith. In other words, if you do not all you can do, are you really going to be blessed?

In either case, Priesthood Power always seems to win. If a person is healed through medical care/science then it was priesthood that caused it. If the person failed to be healed, it was God’s desire not to invoke His power for that individual.

That's because it's the way it is. Not much I can do to change it - even if it is unfalisfiable. I don't think God wants himself to be an issue of proof.

I can give lot's of examples where priesthood promises have not resulted in the promised results...but what I am asking…has there EVER been an example of a verifiable case where a priesthood blessing actually resulted in the promised healing, drought ended, famine reversed, dead person raised that an objective, independent observer could confirm as having been accomplished through a priesthood blessing promise? Or is it just a case of me being the only person seeing that the Emperor has no clothes.

That's the point... you aren't supposed to have an objective independent observer confirm it as having been a priesthood blessing promise. And you probably couldn't anyways, under other circumstances, as it is very difficult to tell what will happen if something intervenes or doesn't intervene. There are miraculous things that happen out there, and regardless of whether or not you believe they are from God, separating them between what is from God, and what isn't, is going to be rather difficult due to this circumstance.

Also... as said... if things were proved, would we need faith anymore? Would we need to believe, would we need to have hope, or charity? No, we would not need these things. But we do need these things - we need faith, and hope, and charity. And it will bring us to the fountain of righteousness. If we do those things. That is his promise. I am not going to complain about the way he does it, because ultimately, I know, he will always be right, and I, a foolish man.

Best wishes,

Your friend,

TAO =)

[TAO]

Mudcat, my friend, there are experiences which one shouldn't share with others.

I know there are, because I've had one.

Humble Wishes,

TAO

[Mars]

As I am thinking about the only things, I don't share often are related to what I would call good works. It's sort of like Christ was saying about how we shouldn't pray out loud to demonstrate piety. There have been times when I felt prompted to do things by the Holy Spirit and have followed through with action. I don't share those things much.. only when I feel compelled by the Spirit that I should, actually.

I don't feel that experiences between myself, the one I am blessing, and the Almighty are mine to share without their consent.

For a hilariously embarrassing story that involves only myself, click here...

[Mark Beesley]

Supernatural claim come from someone elses post.

Yeah, too many "Brians" floating around the board . . . sorry for the confusion.

[Deborah]

Have I seen a Priesthood blessing given and healing take place. Yes. Have I seen Priesthood blessings given and healing not take place. Again yes. It's interesting though in the cases where healing did take place it really was a matter of exigency. In other cases it was a challenge that one had to deal with but was able to do so because of the blessing.

A question was asked about fasting to alleviate natural disasters. I can tell of one. In Calif several years ago we were going through a very bad drought. They had already started rationing water by only having certain days you could water your lawn. The state was on the verge of putting significant water rationing in place. The stakes were asked to fast and pray that the drought be lifted. Soon after that the heavens opened and the rain came and the rationing was averted.

In my own life I have seen significant miracles in answer to prayers. Some even involving weather.

The power of the Priesthood isn't just to heal people. It is a power that inseminates to whatever area it is in. It can bless an entire community without the community being aware.

[Log]

Personally, when I give a Priesthood blessing, I try to remember to articulate a reliance on the skill of the doctors, following their advice, and taking prescribed medications, etc. Kinda like, faith without works is dead, you know, that sorta thing.

I would say remembering to articulate things the Spirit isn't telling you to articulate, requiring your rememberance therefore, is not blessing. Just me.

[Sleeper Cell]

I have heard this explanation before too, and to me it has always made God seem extremely petty (assuming the existence of God). What do you mean that a "loving" omnipotent, omniscient God would withhold blessings from someone -- things they actually need -- because they refuse to ask him for those blessings?

As an analogy, if I had a child that, through wrong choices, was in a bad economic situation and I had the resources to help him, I would give the child food, clothing, and shelter simply because it's the right thing to do, even if the child was unwilling to ask me for help.

I can't imagine that a loving God would withhold this type of support simply because of the failure of someone to ask for it.

Perhaps it may have something to do with the “omniscient” part.

[elguanteloko]

I’m sure there are hundreds of examples where priesthood power has failed to produce the promised blessings.

Patriarchal blessings alone would make quite a bunch of these.

[elguanteloko]

I refer you to the threads on the "Uselessness" of Personal revelation and Rational Thought.

I don't know if there has EVER been an example of a verifiable case that an objective, independent observer could confirm. Has there EVER been an objective, independent observer? And by what discipline's measure of verifying?

Is it the same to think that a specific type of cancer is caused by the position of Venus or do a ton of medical research and think that some pollutant caused it? Science doesn't claim to be absolutely "objective and independent" since such a thing could NOT be science at all. Science explains, not only observes. If you only observe then you are not explaining anything. Also, the fact that there are many more ways of getting something wrong than there are of getting it right should not produce the attitude you have here of trying to relativize science into absurdity, but probably should direct you more to science and to try (as far as possible) to get what's good in its methods to form more reliable knowledge.

[Jeff K.]

Is it the same to think that a specific type of cancer is caused by the position of Venus or do a ton of medical research and think that some pollutant caused it? Science doesn't claim to be absolutely "objective and independent" since such a thing could NOT be science at all. Science explains, not only observes. If you only observe then you are not explaining anything. Also, the fact that there are many more ways of getting something wrong than there are of getting it right should not produce the attitude you have here of trying to relativize science into absurdity, but probably should direct you more to science and to try (as far as possible) to get what's good in its methods to form more reliable knowledge.

The trouble is science explains what it cannot know by using terms like anomaly, its better than saying "I don't know". And science is often oblivious of what is going on around its observations and therefore only explains what it can observe, not what is out there. So at best, science is limited observation of some phenomena and some explanations of predictability. Its not a bad system. But to think it is the ultimate system is somewhat limited in my view. It tells us how things operate to a certain extent (though much is still unknown), but science can never fully tell us why.

So to reject all other systems simply because science has some use is illogical and in itself irrational reflecting more on a dogmatic self belief stance with the ideal of science thrown under the bus for dogmatic purposes. I am constantly amazed when science is caught on its heels because of some folk medicine or other showing them a new way to see things. Or theories rejected by the scientific community for years eventually becoming the norm. Science's observation of nature is limited, myopic, and not entirely trustworthy or at least free of politics.

[elguanteloko]

But to think it is the ultimate system is somewhat limited in my view.

We can agree on this one. No one is saying otherwise. What is in question is whether a very specific series of hypotheses is testable through scientific means. If you say they aren't you need to explain SPECIFICALLY why they are not. If they are then let's get to work!

It tells us how things operate to a certain extent (though much is still unknown), but science can never fully tell us why.

And whoever does tell you "fully why" is making a fool of you. Every method known can tell you how things operate "to a certain extent". Even God (if he exists) doesn't tell you a bunch of things so he also tells you things "to a certain extent".

So to reject all other systems simply because science has some use is illogical and in itself irrational reflecting more on a dogmatic self belief stance with the ideal of science thrown under the bus for dogmatic purposes. I am constantly amazed when science is caught on its heels because of some folk medicine or other showing them a new way to see things. Or theories rejected by the scientific community for years eventually becoming the norm. Science's observation of nature is limited, myopic, and not entirely trustworthy or at least free of politics.

What is trustworthy for you, Jeff? What is more trustworthy for you in the issues science deals with than science for acquiring reliable knowledge?

[Jeff K.]

Very little is trustworthy. I don't put dogmatic faith in science because science is constantly wrong. I won't be sending letters to the patent office suggesting that nothing else can be invented, nor will I suggest that science or the scientific method is the only way to learn. My faith is in God.

Quote

It tells us how things operate to a certain extent (though much is still unknown), but science can never fully tell us why.

And whoever does tell you "fully why" is making a fool of you. Every method known can tell you how things operate "to a certain extent". Even God (if he exists) doesn't tell you a bunch of things so he also tells you things "to a certain extent".

Actually it is the fool that believes there is no "why", and so closes himself to the question.

[elguanteloko]

Very little is trustworthy. I don't put dogmatic faith in science because science is constantly wrong. I won't be sending letters to the patent office suggesting that nothing else can be invented, nor will I suggest that science or the scientific method is the only way to learn. My faith is in God.

I was speaking on issues of science. Is there something more trustworthy than science on the issues science DOES deal with? "Trustworthy" doesn't mean you think it's absolute or even perfect at all. It just means you think it's the best one around NOT that it is perfect or anything of the sort. I'm also NOT speaking of faith.

Actually it is the fool that believes there is no "why", and so closes himself to the question.

?? Who the heck is saying there isn't a "why" or an explanation? Jeff, you need to focus here, man. You are obviously not thinking very clearly right now.

[hansene]

The promised blessings depend on our faith. We have to do everything we can to accomplish then God can fulfill the promise. You also need to realize that man may say his desires over the Lord's desire. Let us not forget we are all human and make mistakes. Let us remember that the blessings may come true in the next life. It all depends on Gods will and our faith. We have to accept Gods will which means we need patience. Think about your testimony of the restored gospel. I don't know why you are not a member and I am not going to ask but you once had a testimony. You have seen the miracles the priesthood. Yes there is power in the priesthood. We don't talk about all that happens with it as it is sacred.

This website takes you to a talk called priesthood power. It is by Elder John H. Groberg of the Seventy.

http://lds.org/liahona/2001/07/priesthood-power?lang=eng&query=power+priesthood

To comply with the truth in posting laws … let me start by stating that I am no longer a member of the church and therefore, as a male, would no longer be viewed as "holding" the priesthood.

So here’s my question.

Is there really power in priesthood?

Now before anyone flames me for even asking such a question let me interject that I acknowledge the comfort, the reassurance, the peace that can come through a priesthood blessing. I have personally witnessed people in deep personal pain (anguish not physical pain) given great comfort through a male laying their hands on the head of an individual and calling down the power of God and stating words of comfort that express God’s love for that individual along with promises specific to the needs of that individual.

So in examples like this I do see value and power…to sooth a troubled heart.

What I am asking is actual power to heal or command God’s power in some other physical manner.

01. Recently a dear friend’s child was diagnosed with cancer. The local priesthood brethren give this child multiple priesthood blessings each promising her that she would be healed. Only after it became apparent that her cancer was extremely advanced did they reverse course and offer priesthood blessings to prepare her for the inevitable. She died after a long and valiant battle. And although her parents I’m sure found comfort in those latter blessing…the earlier blessing went unfulfilled.

02. James E. Talmage, in a tragic farming accident, blinded his younger brother with a pitch fork. Years later as a member of the 12 Apostles, he and other members of the 12 gave a priesthood blessing promising a full restoration of his brothers sight (in this life). He died a blind man, the promised restoration unfulfilled.

I’m sure there are hundreds of examples where priesthood power has failed to produce the promised blessings. Yet IF the desired outcome occurs…in other words if medical science produces the desired result…priesthood power gets the credit. And if the priesthood promise is not fulfilled then the default answer is that that was God’s will.

In either case, Priesthood Power always seems to win. If a person is healed through medical care/science then it was priesthood that caused it. If the person failed to be healed, it was God’s desire not to invoke His power for that individual.

I can give lot's of examples where priesthood promises have not resulted in the promised results...but what I am asking…has there EVER been an example of a verifiable case where a priesthood blessing actually resulted in the promised healing, drought ended, famine reversed, dead person raised that an objective, independent observer could confirm as having been accomplished through a priesthood blessing promise? Or is it just a case of me being the only person seeing that the Emperor has no clothes.

[elguanteloko]

Again, Jeff, you need to explain why these sort of miracles aren't up to scientific scrutiny.

[Jeff K.]

It has been explained. To put it in terms you would understand.... the instrumentation falls short and isn't sensitive enough to measure at that level.

[Jeff K.]

Jeff K., on 28 May 2011 - 04:10 PM, said:

Very little is trustworthy. I don't put dogmatic faith in science because science is constantly wrong. I won't be sending letters to the patent office suggesting that nothing else can be invented, nor will I suggest that science or the scientific method is the only way to learn. My faith is in God.

I was speaking on issues of science. Is there something more trustworthy than science on the issues science DOES deal with? "Trustworthy" doesn't mean you think it's absolute or even perfect at all. It just means you think it's the best one around NOT that it is perfect or anything of the sort. I'm also NOT speaking of faith.

I don't think a car is trustworthy if I need to fly to the moon. So a blanket statement as to what is or is not trustworthy in all things is absolutist in itself. A testube will not tell me what is or is not spiritual and many other tools will be inadequate to the task and therefore untrustworthy if I seek to know spiritual things.

[Jeff K.]

Quote

Actually it is the fool that believes there is no "why", and so closes himself to the question.

?? Who the heck is saying there isn't a "why" or an explanation? Jeff, you need to focus here, man. You are obviously not thinking very clearly right now.

When stymied you always go back to the "you need to focus", might I suggest your myopia is getting in the way of your learning?

[ERMD]

Patriarchal blessings alone would make quite a bunch of these.

Examples?

Aside from lineage, most components of patriarchal blessings are conditional.

[ERMD]

During my earlier years while I was attending Weber State college I was working part-time at the McKay Dee hospital across the street as an orderly. Most of us orderlys were return missionaries and we quite often were called upon to give priesthood blessings to patients. On one occasion we were asked by the mother of a young lady who just had a baby to give the baby a blessing. It had been born with a rare skin condition which made the skin like tissue paper and would easily tear open and bleed if touched.

The doctors told the family that the baby will die from this very painful condition. So the grandmother asked us to bless the baby that it would die soon so it wouldn't have to suffer so much for too long. So we went into the intensive care nursery where we put on gown and gloves and mask and were led to the incubator of the baby. She was screaming quite obviously from the pain of all the bleeding cuts and tears in her skin. Because of her constantly kicking her feet against the bed the skin on the heals of her feet was completely rubbed off and bleeding as well as the back of her head. We could not touch her or use oil so we just placed our hands under the sheet she laid on to perform the blessing. As I was giving the blessing I felt a distinct impression that the baby was not supposed to die as the doctors said, so I blessed her that she would be healed and continue to live. I did not have the heart to tell the grandmother that I did not obey her wishes so I just said that everything would be alright.

A few weeks later I got word that within a couple of weeks after the blessing the skin condition had cleared up and that the baby was going to live and be alright. Now one can argue that it was the continuing work of the doctors and medical staff that led to her recovery to a normal physical condition, which I am sure was a contributing factor, but I can't help but think that the power of the priesthood and the will of god were the main forces behind the healing. In this particular situation with a newborn baby, there was no power of suggestion involved or even the faith of the patient or family who were expecting her to die; just a priesthood blessing.

God wants us all to live by faith. If all priesthood blessing resulted in miraculous healings there would be no more need to live by faith.

I'm still waiting for someone to refute this.

I'd also like to hear arguments against the experiences of Matthew Cowley:

http://lds.org/ensign/2004/10/miracles?lang=eng

[rpn]

We see raw priesthood power in Jesus calming the waves and raising the dead. When priesthood blessings do not produce the result that is expected, one of several explanations fit: 1) Those who gave the blessing did not utter the words God inspired them to do -- sometimes humans pray for what they want. 2) The words were interpreted wrongly. 3) The persons involved chose not to do something or chose to do something ----- and God doesn't interfere with agency in most cases. Maybe it was God's will for a dr to catch something, that the dr didn't catch or do that changed an outcome. Or maybe the child was praying for something different than her parents were.

[Craig Paxton]

From what I can gather. Some who receive blessings recover some don't. Some who don't receive blessings recover some don't. Both mormon and non mormon Same result. In the end it just comes down to personal perception and interpretation

[elguanteloko]

It has been explained. To put it in terms you would understand.... the instrumentation falls short and isn't sensitive enough to measure at that level.

Why? You just assert that but you don't explain why this is the case.