The Prophet Is Infallible

[Thinking]

Of course no man is perfect, but should a true prophet be perfect in some things?

Here are some questions to ponder.

1. Should a true prophet be infallible with regards to published doctrine?

2. Should a true prophet be infallible with regards to policy?

3. Should a true prophet be infallible with regards to prepared talks in general conference?

[CASteinman]

Of course no man is perfect, but should a true prophet be perfect in some things?

Here are some questions to ponder.

1. Should a true prophet be infallible with regards to published doctrine?

2. Should a true prophet be infallible with regards to policy?

3. Should a true prophet be infallible with regards to prepared talks in general conference?

I think the questions are all wrong.

We should be asking --- are we infallible in our efforts to follow Christ though the Spirit and the inspired instructions of the Prophets and Apostles?

No? Then we have something more to worry about than whether the prophets are equal to God in their knowledge of things.

(As for the questions: The only way that such things can be infallible is if the people who present the teachings were perfect.)

Edited June 13, 2012 by CASteinman

[Thinking]

I think the questions are all wrong.

I didn't know we were playing Jeopardy.

We should be asking --- are we infallible in our efforts to follow Christ though the Spirit and the inspired instructions of the Prophets and Apostles?

Instructions which may be fallible.

No? Then we have something more to worry about than whether the prophets are equal to God in their knowledge of things.

Shouldn't a prophet be equal to God in the knowledge of the things that God has revealed to that prophet?

As for the questions: The only way that such things can be infallible is if the people who present the teachings were perfect.

So if God tells a prophet something to tell the church, and the prophet tells the church exactly what God said, what the prophet told the church is not perfect because the prophet is not perfect in some other aspect of his life?

[CASteinman]

Shouldn't a prophet be equal to God in the knowledge of the things that God has revealed to that prophet?

I see no reason to believe that for even one second.

[CASteinman]

So if God tells a prophet something to tell the church, and the prophet tells the church exactly what God said, what the prophet told the church is not perfect because the prophet is not perfect in some other aspect of his life?

No. Because the prophet is not perfect. His words will not be perfect. His speech will not be perfect. He will not be perfectly understandable to all who hear. He is imperfect.

Plus, the nature of revelation is, in my experience, such that only in the moment of revelation are all things clear.

[zerinus]

Zerinus - in as much as he is able to take the info conveyed by the spirit and adequately transfer that into mortal ways of understanding it... ex: language, context, ect...

Otherwise... absolutely.

Would you concede that a prophet or apostle might think he is speaking by the spirit but not be doing so and get something wrong?

No; a prophet will always know when he is speaking by the power of the Holy Ghost. If he doesn't or is not sure, then he isn't.

[zerinus]

Of course no man is perfect, but should a true prophet be perfect in some things?

Here are some questions to ponder.

1. Should a true prophet be infallible with regards to published doctrine?

2. Should a true prophet be infallible with regards to policy?

3. Should a true prophet be infallible with regards to prepared talks in general conference?

A prophet is (or should be if you like) infallible when he declares the word of the Lord.

[thesometimesaint]

See Common Consent.

http://institute.lds.org/manuals/doctrine-and-covenants-institute-student-manual/dc-in-021-26.asp

D&C 26:2 . The Law of Common Consent

Elder Bruce R. McConkie explained that “administrative affairs of the Church are handled in accordance with the law of common consent . This law is that in God’s earthly kingdom, the King counsels what should be done, but then he allows his subjects to accept or reject his proposals. Unless the principle of free agency is operated in righteousness men do not progress to ultimate salvation in the heavenly kingdom hereafter. Accordingly, church officers are selected by the spirit of revelation in those appointed to choose them, but before the officers may serve in their positions, they must receive a formal sustaining vote of the people over whom they are to preside. ( D. & C. 20:60–67 ; 26:2 ; 28 ; 38:34–35 ; 41:9–11 ; 42:11 ; 102:9 ; 124:124–145 .)” ( Mormon Doctrine, pp. 149–50.)

Not only are Church officers sustained by common consent, but this same principle operates for policies, major decisions, acceptance of new scripture, and other things that affect the lives of the Saints (see D&C 26:2 ).

[mfbukowski]

Shouldn't a prophet be equal to God in the knowledge of the things that God has revealed to that prophet?

So if God tells a prophet something to tell the church, and the prophet tells the church exactly what God said, what the prophet told the church is not perfect because the prophet is not perfect in some other aspect of his life?

Unfortunately revelations are often not linguistic they are feelings and strokes of insight.

They have nothing in common with shopping lists.

[Nominee]

If God himself approached you, you knew that it was him, and asked you to do something in his name ~ would you know that it was right (even if by the Spirit) and do as he asked of you without hesitation?

Now, if God's chosen prophet approached you, you knew that it was him, and asked you to do something in the name of God ~ would you know that it was right (even if by the Spirit) and do as he asked of you without hesitation?

If you answered yes to the first question but no to the second, therein lies the problem. Is it the prophet's fallibility that should be in question? I say no.

~ Naomi

[mfbukowski]

If you have experienced revelation, you know what it's like, and if you haven't you don't. It's that simple. The taste of salt and all that.

Revelation 19:10

And I fell at his feet to worship him. And he said unto me, See thou do it not: I am thy fellowservant, and of thy brethren that have the testimony of Jesus: worship God: for the testimony of Jesus is the spirit of prophecy.

We are all "prophets" in that sense- but of course our responsibilities for whom we can receive guidance differ. THE prophet is in a different position administratively, but he still receives the same kinds of revelations we all do.

And I am sure more, as well because he has kept himself, for virtually a lifetime, close to the spirit.

If we don't have our own testimonies- ie: revelations from heaven about the truth of this work, that is, if we are not ourselves prophets to at least a small degree, we don't belong in the church.

Edited June 13, 2012 by mfbukowski

[Nominee]

If you have experienced revelation, you know what it's like, and if you haven't you don't. It's that simple. The taste of salt and all that.

Very good point; Well made, sir!

[ERayR]

If you have experienced revelation, you know what it's like, and if you haven't you don't. It's that simple. The taste of salt and all that.

Revelation 19:10

We are all "prophets" in that sense- but of course our responsibilities for whom we can receive guidance differ. THE prophet is in a different position administratively, but he still receives the same kinds of revelations we all do.

And I am sure more, as well because he has kept himself, for virtually a lifetime, close to the spirit.

If we don't have our own testimonies- ie: revelations from heaven about the truth of this work, that is, if we are not ourselves prophets to at least a small degree, we don't belong in the church.

And for this reason I get a bit uneasy second guessing the Prophets advice and council. I first ask myself what I am missing that he may be seeing.

[treehugger]

Is there any Official LDS Doctrine/Teachings on the infallibility or fallibility of Prophets?

[Calm]

If one does a search on lds.org, I think there are enough statements along the line of the below to make a claim this is an official teaching:

We make no claim of individual infallibility or perfection as the prophets, seers, and revelators.

http://www.lds.org/ensign/1996/08/continuing-revelation?lang=eng&query=infallibility

To be an Apostle of the Lord, I am finding, is a process—a process of repentance and humility, to look inward as we’ve been instructed and ask for forgiveness and strength to be what I should be. Unfortunately, I am not a perfect man, and infallibility does not come with the call. Therefore, I must ask for forgiveness from Heavenly Father for those things which I have done which are less than perfect and ask forgiveness of anyone I might have offended knowingly or unknowingly because of my personality or style.

http://www.lds.org/general-conference/1994/04/the-unique-message-of-jesus-christ?lang=eng&query=infallibility Edited June 13, 2012 by calmoriah

[Bill “Papa” Lee]

Yesterday in Elder's Quorum, I was teaching the lesson "Revelation from God to His Children", and as always, I started off the lesson with a few "trivia" questions.

One of the questions was "What is infallibility, and do we believe in it?" Several members of the quorum said no, we don't believe in it, but one member (the Sunday School President), raised his hand and said that when it comes to the Prophet, "I do believe he is infallible."

I was obviously a little taken aback, and one of the class members (a scholar and a gentleman) raised his hand and said he views the Prophets the way Emma viewed Joseph Smith, something to the effect that "Sometimes he was 'Joseph Smith the Prophet', and other times he was 'Joseph Smith the Man'"

But there you have it. One LDS who spoke up in defense of Prophetic infallibility.

God only uses flawed men...he cannot find any others.

[altersteve]

Is there any Official LDS Doctrine/Teachings on the infallibility or fallibility of Prophets?

The official doctrine is that no one but God is infallible.

[cinepro]

The official doctrine is that no one but God is infallible.

But it gets a little more complicated when we stop asking if "the man" is infallible and turn to a consideration of "the man's teachings".

The Church acknowledges that the men leading it are fallible (I suspect this acknowledgement is based partly on the fact that it is obvious), but it's a little harder to find any teachings on the Church website about the leader's statements and actions being fallible.

Acknowledgement of the possibility of "fallible" teachings is usually accompanied by the idea that we should follow them anyway. It's never presented with the option that sometimes we might not need to follow them, or even more unlikely, that the Spirit might tell us they were wrong.

[mfbukowski]

But it gets a little more complicated when we stop asking if "the man" is infallible and turn to a consideration of "the man's teachings".

The Church acknowledges that the men leading it are fallible (I suspect this acknowledgement is based partly on the fact that it is obvious), but it's a little harder to find any teachings on the Church website about the leader's statements and actions being fallible.

Acknowledgement of the possibility of "fallible" teachings is usually accompanied by the idea that we should follow them anyway. It's never presented with the option that sometimes we might not need to follow them, or even more unlikely, that the Spirit might tell us they were wrong.

You really should listen to conference better.

This is the most recent statement on this:

At the same time it should be remembered that not every statement made by a Church leader, past or present, necessarily constitutes doctrine. It is commonly understood in the Church that a statement made by one leader on a single occasion often represents a personal, though well-considered, opinion, not meant to be official or binding for the whole Church. The Prophet Joseph Smith taught that “a prophet [is] a prophet only when he [is] acting as such.”⁵ President Clark, quoted earlier, observed:

“To this point runs a simple story my father told me as a boy, I do not know on what authority, but it illustrates the point. His story was that during the excitement incident to the coming of [Johnston’s] Army, Brother Brigham preached to the people in a morning meeting a sermon vibrant with defiance to the approaching army, and declaring an intention to oppose and drive them back. In the afternoon meeting he arose and said that Brigham Young had been talking in the morning, but the Lord was going to talk now. He then delivered an address, the tempo of which was the opposite from the morning talk. …

“… The Church will know by the testimony of the Holy Ghost in the body of the members, whether the brethren in voicing their views are ‘moved upon by the Holy Ghost’; and in due time that knowledge will be made manifest.”⁶

http://www.lds.org/general-conference/2012/04/the-doctrine-of-christ?lang=eng&query=*+%28name%3a%22D.+Todd+Christofferson%22%29

Let me repeat that last sentence, with emphasis:

“… The Church will know by the testimony of the Holy Ghost in the body of the members, whether the brethren in voicing their views are ‘moved upon by the Holy Ghost’; and in due time that knowledge will be made manifest.”

[cinepro]

You really should listen to conference better.

This is the most recent statement on this:

http://www.lds.org/g...hristofferson")

Let me repeat that last sentence, with emphasis:

“… The Church will know by the testimony of the Holy Ghost in the body of the members, whether the brethren in voicing their views are ‘moved upon by the Holy Ghost’; and in due time that knowledge will be made manifest.”

What are Church members supposed to do when the brethren voice their views and the Holy Ghost tells us that they were not "moved upon by the Holy Ghost" in speaking? This would be an obvious and important question, yet I don't think the Church tells us.

For example, suppose it was made known to an LDS by the Holy Ghost that the brethren were erring in their views against Same-Sex Marriage. What would be the proper course of action for them?

Edited June 13, 2012 by cinepro

[thesometimesaint]

cinepro:

Use your best understanding of what the Holy Ghost is telling you to, and vote according to your conscience. But your individual revelation can not be held by the Church.

Edited June 13, 2012 by thesometimesaint

[mfbukowski]

What are Church members supposed to do when the brethren voice their views and the Holy Ghost tells us that they were not "moved upon by the Holy Ghost" in speaking? This would be an obvious and important question, yet I don't think the Church tells us.

For example, suppose it was made known to an LDS by the Holy Ghost that the brethren were erring in their views against Same-Sex Marriage. What would be the proper course of action for them?

I think it is fairly obvious. We are not robots. If we do not have testimonies of what the church teaches us, we should not be in it.

Are you a member of a church which teaches transubstantiation- that the sacrament bread becomes not a symbol, but the actual body and blood soul and divinity of the Savior?

Why are you not a member of such a church? Because you don't believe it.

I am not in favor of joining or remaining in churches one doesn't believe in. Who would be?

Now if one wasn't sure if the spirit testified that to him- that is a whole different story. One should seek out advice, or as the statement says,

“… The Church will know by the testimony of the Holy Ghost in the body of the members, whether the brethren in voicing their views are ‘moved upon by the Holy Ghost’; and in due time that knowledge will be made manifest.”

What is that saying? It is saying the the Church- that is US- will know by the testimony of the HG in the BODY OF THE MEMBERS whether the brethren are moved upon by the Holy Ghost. THE MEMBERS are the ones who ultimately vote with their feet. We may sustain with the right hand, but we demonstrate that sustaining with our feet. If no one has a testimony of the church, or a principle, the church is not correct.

Polygamy was changed "in due time" when "that knowledge (was) made manifest"

Blacks got the priesthood "in due time" when "that knowledge (was) made manifest"

I personally believe that day will never come with same sex marriage, but if and when it does, I will pray about it on my knees, but my feet will decide.

That is the problem with cultural Mormons. They are in the church for the wrong reasons. They are the only ones who would have this problem.

I mean if you are looking for nice people, Baptists and Buddhists are nice people too- go join them! There are tons of churches who believe just about anything anyone can come up with. Pick one and enjoy the nice people.

But that is not the gospel.

[Damien the Leper]

I reject the notion of infallibility outrightly. Not because of some silly desire to sin or rebel but because the notion is pretentious, audacious, and arrogant. Look at the history of the RCC, for example.

My aunt who is a Catholic who lives in Price, UT says this:

"Catholics say the Pope is infallible but don't believe it. Mormons say the Prophet isn't infallible and don't believe it."

[DBMormon]

I mean if you are looking for nice people, Baptists and Buddhists are nice people too- go join them! There are tons of churches who believe just about anything anyone can come up with. Pick one and enjoy the nice people.

I want a church that has

-the Book of Mormon

-a prophet and apostles

-the holy ghost

-leaders talk to Christ face to face daily

-top leaders never insert their foot in their mouth

-angels tell the all members face to face the church is true at least once a year

- tithing is 3% of a combination of time and money.

- all leaders can sit with their family in the pew

- oh yeah.... and less meetings!!!!

any suggestions?????

Edited June 14, 2012 by reelmormon

[Duncan]

I want a church that has

-the Book of Mormon

-a prophet and apostles

-the holy ghost

-leaders talk to Christ face to face daily

-top leaders never insert their foot in their mouth

-angels tell the all members face to face the church is true at least once a year

- tithing is 3% of a combination of time and money.

- all leaders can sit with their family in the pew

- oh yeah.... and less meetings!!!!

any suggestions?????

start your own church