When We Sustain The 12, As “Prophets, Seers And Revelators” What Do We Mean?

[Bill “Papa” Lee]

On another thread about the Book of Hebrews, some questions came to mind. Since (like no other Church on earth) we sustain those of the Twelve and the First Presidency as “Prophets, Seers and Revelators”, men who are “Special Witnesses of Christ”, how far does that go in accepting their words as the final word?

For instance if Peter attributed Hebrews to Paul as did the early Apostles; also the Apostles now; why question it?

Do we (or individually) truly see them as “Prophets, Seers and Revelators”; or do we only do so if we agree with them?

How much do we really believe?

[thesometimesaint]

Pa Pa:

To me each one is a prophet, seer, revelator in their own right. But when speaking for the whole Church it must be by unanimus agreement. IE; When Peter and Paul were disagreeing on the need for Christians to also be Jewish. It wasn't until Peter had his revelation that the Church changed.

[David T]

On another thread about the Book of Hebrews, some questions came to mind. Since (like no other Church on earth) we sustain those of the Twelve and the First Presidency as “Prophets, Seers and Revelators”, men who are “Special Witnesses of Christ”, how far does that go in accepting their words as the final word?

For instance if Peter attributed Hebrews to Paul as did the early Apostles; also the Apostles now; why question it?

There is so very little substance at all to the claim that the (very likely pseudepigraphical) writer of 2 Peter was even referencing the Letter to the Hebrews when he made his claim that sometimes Paul was a little hard to understand. It's a beyond shaky premise.

IE, there's no reason to believe we have any record of Peter saying anything about the Letter to the Hebrews.

Do we (or individually) truly see them as “Prophets, Seers and Revelators”; or do we only do so if we agree with them?

How much do we really believe?

I think it also comes down to how you understand the historical prophets, seers, and revelators. I've been studying the pre-exilic Prophets lately. At face value, their message has nothing to do with specifics of the future, or the past. It is, through inspiration, seeing and revealing the behavior that has led to their current struggles, and forewarning them that such continued behavior will inevitably lead to destruction. And they searve as God's messenger ("prophet") to warn, and send out the message, often giving a generalized view of the Hope and Good Life that will result as the message of practical selfless living, and loyalty to YHWH.

Any specificity of future events is usually within the next couple years (from where they are), which ends with a grand vision of the Eschatological End, where everything eventually works out.

Today, Prophets, Seers, and Revelators see patterns of destruction. They reveal what will happen in general terms if such patterns continue. The serve as a messenger (literally prophet)and warn us of what action we currently need to take. They stand as witnesses as the reality of Jesus Christ. They don't give detailed views of tens, hundreds, or thousands of years into the future, but speak of the eventual Second Coming/Millennium where everything eventually works out. They don't open up the dark reaches of history.

They see us, the course of our actions is revealed, and they warn us of the course of our destructive actions, and give us a path to follow to avoid that destruction. They bear witness of the beacon to which we should be drawn - Christ. They express their understanding of God's nature and His plan as their experience and understanding has had it made known to them.

Everything else is the framework by which those roles and goals are accomplished, and understood. This is the prophetic pattern, and is how I sustain them as Prophets, Seers, and Revelators.

The Ancient Scriptural History Books (Genesis - 2 Kings, Chronicles/Ezra/Nehemiah) were narratively crafted to give perspective to where the Israelites were now, and how they got there, and how they can get out of the trouble they are in. Historical facts (for example, many detailed prophecies were inserted in past events or circumstances after the fact with clear hindsight to reinforce the principle in a very strong way that the warnings in the past should have been heeded, and the results of not listening were therefore clear) gave way to the far more important priority of teaching principles and patterns (and the current national ideals) - just as the Joseph Smith era History of the Church (and more so in later Church-produced editions) had a specific apologetic and spiritual teaching purpose to it, that was crafted around telling the story of the saints in context of their current understanding of their place in the Cosmic Struggle.

Today, we have a new generation (dispensation?) of prophetic warnings, oracles, and newly re-organized context for our spiritual history, crafted through inspiration and revelation to speak directly to us, and to the struggles and problems and needs of us today.

Edited October 27, 2011 by nackhadlow

[Bill “Papa” Lee]

There is so very little substance at all to the claim that the (very likely pseudepigraphical) writer of 2 Peter was even referencing the Letter to the Hebrews when he made his claim that sometimes Paul was a little hard to understand. It's a beyond shaky premise.

IE, there's no reason to believe we have any record of Peter saying anything about the Letter to the Hebrews.

I think it also comes down to how you understand the historical prophets, seers, and revelators. I've been studying the pre-exilic Prophets lately. At face value, their message has nothing to do with specifics of the future, or the past. It is, through inspiration, seeing and revealing the behavior that has led to their current struggles, and forewarning them that such continued behavior will inevitably lead to destruction. And they searve as God's messenger ("prophet") to warn, and send out the message, often giving a generalized view of the Hope and Good Life that will result as the message of practical selfless living, and loyalty to YHWH.

Any specificity of future events is usually within the next couple years (from where they are), which ends with a grand vision of the Eschatological End, where everything eventually works out.

Today, Prophets, Seers, and Revelators see patterns of destruction. They reveal what will happen in general terms if such patterns continue. The serve as a messenger (literally prophet)and warn us of what action we currently need to take. They stand as witnesses as the reality of Jesus Christ. They don't give detailed views of tens, hundreds, or thousands of years into the future, but speak of the eventual Second Coming/Millennium where everything eventually works out. They don't open up the dark reaches of history.

They see us, the course of our actions is revealed, and they warn us of the course of our destructive actions, and give us a path to follow to avoid that destruction. They bear witness of the beacon to which we should be drawn - Christ. They express their understanding of God's nature and His plan as their experience and understanding has had it made known to them.

Everything else is the framework by which those roles and goals are accomplished, and understood. This is the prophetic pattern, and is how I sustain them as Prophets, Seers, and Revelators.

The Ancient Scriptural History Books (Genesis - 2 Kings, Chronicles/Ezra/Nehemiah) were narratively crafted to give perspective to where the Israelites were now, and how they got there, and how they can get out of the trouble they are in. Historical facts (for example, many detailed prophecies were inserted in past events or circumstances after the fact with clear hindsight to reinforce the principle in a very strong way that the warnings in the past should have been heeded, and the results of not listening were therefore clear) gave way to the far more important priority of teaching principles and patterns (and the current national ideals) - just as the Joseph Smith era History of the Church (and more so in later Church-produced editions) had a specific apologetic and spiritual teaching purpose to it, that was crafted around telling the story of the saints in context of their current understanding of their place in the Cosmic Struggle.

Today, we have a new generation (dispensation?) of prophetic warnings, oracles, and newly re-organized context for our spiritual history, crafted through inspiration and revelation to speak directly to us, and to the struggles and problems and needs of us today.

So they are guessing, no real communication with Christ himself (who knows all things)? Does this mean that they are just giving their opinion like political pundits as a warning voice? Does this not just turn them into very good men with administrative skills suited to run the Church?

[David T]

So they are guessing, no real communication with Christ himself (who knows all things)? Does this mean that they are just giving their opinion like political pundits as a warning voice? Does this not just turn them into very good men with administrative skills suited to run the Church?

I'll respond when you point out where I asserted any of those things.

[Bill “Papa” Lee]

I'll respond when you point out where I asserted any of those things.

I'll respond when you point out where I asserted any of those things.

I think it also comes down to how you understand the historical prophets, seers, and revelators. I've been studying the pre-exilic Prophets lately. At face value, their message has nothing to do with specifics of the future, or the past. It is, through inspiration, seeing and revealing the behavior that has led to their current struggles, and forewarning them that such continued behavior will inevitably lead to destruction.

Lets start here.

[Kevin Christensen]

On another thread about the Book of Hebrews, some questions came to mind. Since (like no other Church on earth) we sustain those of the Twelve and the First Presidency as “Prophets, Seers and Revelators”, men who are “Special Witnesses of Christ”, how far does that go in accepting their words as the final word?

For instance if Peter attributed Hebrews to Paul as did the early Apostles; also the Apostles now; why question it?

Do we (or individually) truly see them as “Prophets, Seers and Revelators”; or do we only do so if we agree with them?

How much do we really believe?

If you look up the definition of the word "sustain", you'll find that it does not mean "uncritical submission, intellectual surrender, unquestioning obedience."

It meanings include: support, uphold, suffer (both as "permit" and "sustaining an injury"), endure. It means to trust that God knows what he is doing, and to not get over excited about personal differences and human weakness as they may appear from time to time. I think "sustain" is a super word, just right for what we should do and understand.

I've also explored what prophets are and are not, and find that helps me understand just who and what I covenant to sustain.

Kevin Christensen

Pittsburgh, PA

[JeremyOrbe-Smith]

I'd QFT the entirety of posts #3 and #7, but that'd get quite long.

Here are two good essays on the subject: Teaching Practical Prophecy, and God's foreknowledge: This life shows who we are.

Edited October 27, 2011 by JeremyOrbe-Smith

[David T]

Lets start here.

You mean where I said, "It is, through inspiration, seeing and revealing the behavior that has led to their current struggles, and forewarning them that such continued behavior will inevitably lead to destruction."?

IE, the divine insight/communication that gives them 'eyes to see' what the Lord desires they see, to better give the warning he wishes for them to hear.

Would it have been more clear if I had used the term 'revelation' instead of 'inspiration' (which you understand I view to be identical)?

Edited October 27, 2011 by nackhadlow

[Bill “Papa” Lee]

You mean where I said, "It is, through inspiration, seeing and revealing the behavior that has led to their current struggles, and forewarning them that such continued behavior will inevitably lead to destruction."?

IE, the divine insight/communication that gives them 'eyes to see' what the Lord desires they see, to better give the warning he wishes for them to hear.

Would it have been more clear if I had used the term 'revelation' instead of 'inspiration' (which you understand I view to be identical)?

I am not trying to be critical Nack…but I am inspired at times, but I am not a “Prophet, Seers or Revelator”.

[David T]

I am not trying to be critical Nack…but I am inspired at times, but I am not a “Prophet, Seers or Revelator”.

Sure you are, and you should be, for yourself, your family, and those under your direction in Church Callings. The only difference that there should be in this regard between you and those we sustain in General Conference is jurisidiction.

Edited October 27, 2011 by nackhadlow

[Bill “Papa” Lee]

Sure you are, and you should be, for yourself, your family, and those under your direction jurisidiction.

Knowing my flaws (for they are legion)...I could not think of myself as such.

[David T]

Knowing my flaws (for they are legion)...I could not think of myself as such.

Because Joseph Smith, Peter, Isaiah, and Thomas Monson never had doubts about their flaws and inadequacies.

[Zakuska]

A couple of verses I found informative...

1 Samuel 9:9

9 (Beforetime in Israel, when a man went to enquire of God, thus he spake, Come, and let us go to the seer: for he that is now called a Prophet was beforetime called a Seer.)

2 Samuel 24:11

11 For when David was up in the morning, the word of the Lord came unto the prophet Gad, David’s seer, saying,

For all intents and purposes... Prophet, Seer, and Revelator are synonymous terms.

Edited October 27, 2011 by Zakuska

[Bill “Papa” Lee]

Because Joseph Smith, Peter, Isaiah, and Thomas Monson never had doubts about their flaws and inadequacies.

All better men than myself.

[David T]

All better men than myself.

What does this perception (which I don't necessarily know to be true) have to do with anything?

[KevinG]

Knowing my flaws (for they are legion)...I could not think of myself as such.

That used to bother me until I re-read about Lot, Abraham, Jacob and a few other scoundrels that repented and God blessed.

While we should of course strive to be obedient so the Spirit can reside with us, that does not eliminate us from being prophets and revelators within our sphere of influence, be it our selves, families or callings.

Having faith in the atonement and God's ability to make great men out of clay should help us understand our role in His plan better.

Edited October 27, 2011 by DaddyG

[Bill “Papa” Lee]

What does this perception (which I don't necessarily know to be true) have to do with anything?

Their righteousness and callings. As a Father and Husband, I am allowed and do receive inspiration, but I don't know the future and do not speak for all.

[Bill “Papa” Lee]

That used to bother me until I re-read about Lot, Abraham, Jacob and a few other scoundrels that repented and God blessed.

While we should of course strive to be obedient so the Spirit can reside with us, that does not eliminate us from being prophets and revelators within our sphere of influence, be it our selves, families or callings.

Having faith in the atonement and God's ability to make great men out of clay should help us understand our role in His plan better.

Especially Lot...His daughters even more so. Although their could not be enough wine to ever allow for what happened. To me that was pure evil...

[David T]

Especially Lot...His daughters even more so. Although their could not be enough wine to ever allow for what happened. To me that was pure evil...

I'm convinced that the Lot story is, like many of the side-stories in Genesis, the continuance of a polemic just-so story of "origins".

An Israelite boy asks, "Why don't we like the Ammonites or the Moabites all that much, Dad? Where did they come from?"

Dad said, "Well, a long, long time ago, Father Abraham's brother Lot's daughters got him drunk, and...."

The boy then asks, "Well, what about the Canaanites? Why did we feel we had the right to run them out of their land?"

Dad said, "Well, even longer ago, Father Noah got drunk, and..."

Edited October 28, 2011 by nackhadlow

[David T]

Their righteousness and callings. As a Father and Husband, I am allowed and do receive inspiration, but I don't know the future and do not speak for all.

I think the concept that one must be uber-righteous to be usable and chosen by God is contradicted in pretty much every substantial record of and statements by Prophets we have. You being allowed to and actually receiving revelation does make you a Prophet, Seer, and Revelator to yourself, and to your family. a Bishop is a Prophet, Seer, and Revelator as to his ward. The President of the Church is Prophet, Seer, and Revelator as to the Church Entire. The nature and method and power of the warning, seeing, and revealing is not different - only the scope.

Just as you don't always automatically "know" the answer to personal, family, and calling-specific questions without adequate preparation, thought, study, and prayer, so the "General" Prophets, Seers, and Revelators don't always automatically "know" the answer to Church-wide questions without adequate preparation, thought, study, and prayer.

When we understand our ability to stand in these roles under our stewardship, it's much easier to grasp (and identify with) those the Lord has placed with a stewardship over the entire Church. And how they struggle to receive and interpret revelation just as much as you do for your stewardship.

[William Schryver]

I think the concept that one must be uber-righteous to be usable and chosen by God is contradicted in pretty much every substantial record of and statements by Prophets we have. You being allowed to and actually receiving revelation does make you a Prophet, Seer, and Revelator to yourself, and to your family. a Bishop is a Prophet, Seer, and Revelator as to his ward. The President of the Church is Prophet, Seer, and Revelator as to the Church Entire. The nature and method and power of the warning, seeing, and revealing is not different - only the scope.

Just as you don't always automatically "know" the answer to personal, family, and calling-specific questions without adequate preparation, thought, study, and prayer, so the "General" Prophets, Seers, and Revelators don't always automatically "know" the answer to Church-wide questions without adequate preparation, thought, study, and prayer.

When we understand our ability to stand in these roles under our stewardship, it's much easier to grasp (and identify with) those the Lord has placed with a stewardship over the entire Church. And how they struggle to receive and interpret revelation just as much as you do for your stewardship.

My wife and I spoke last Sunday in Sacrament Meeting on the topic of "facing the future with faith." In my talk, I cited one of my favorite Joseph Smith quotes:

“I do not want you to think that I am very righteous, for I am not, God judges men according to the use they make of the light which He gives them.”

Joseph Smith, History of the Church, 5:401

I believe Joseph Smith was a great man; that he was the prophet of the restoration; that God revealed great and marvelous things through him. I don't necessarily regard him as extraordinarily righteous in the sense that, for example, my wife is extraordinarily righteous.

I don't require my prophets and apostles to be either extraordinarily righteous or infallible in everything they write or say. I simply require them to be conduits for the word of God. In that respect, I can say that when General Conference rolls around twice a year, I am never disappointed.

[Damien the Leper]

This is a difficult question, Pa Pa. From what I understand of dissent in the Church there isn't much wiggle room for variance in interpretation of the question you propose.

For me:

1) A GAs interpretation of scripture does not override the ancient language it was written in, the historical context, audience, etc.

2) Scripture is found in the Standard Works until the Lord decides we are ready for more. General Conference talks, Ensign articles, minor speeches, etc. are not scripture.

3) I disagree that a modern prophet is more important than a dead prophet. This has an arid stench of narcissism and arrogance. Abraham is just as important (and possibly more important) than Pres. Monson. I mean no disrespect.

4) I recognize that being called as "Prophet, Seer and Revelator" does not bar any person(s) from the fallacies of their humanity in any given situation. Because all God's children are human, we are subject to that condition without exception.

5) I'm a big fan of relativism in relation to counsel. Not because it relieves responsibility or burden but because God works in us all and in different ways. Because of this, God knows us and knows our heart. Always taking the hard line reminds me of the Pharisees and extreme conservative religionists.

6) If one prays about a specific message given in GC or an Ensign article and receives answer that is not in the affirmative...it is inappropriate to classify that person as "being without the Spirit".

I have been called some negative things in the past because of my position but I stand by it. God is the sole Authority in ALL things.

Edited October 28, 2011 by Valentinus

[volgadon]

Nack, have you ever read Abraham Joshua Heschel's "The Prophets"?

[David T]

Nack, have you ever read Abraham Joshua Heschel's "The Prophets"?

I haven't. Should I?