Stone holm Posted June 30, 2013 Posted June 30, 2013 At what point in our Church History did the form of revelation change from The Lord making declarations to the Prophet, to something looking more like business memorandums?
canard78 Posted July 1, 2013 Posted July 1, 2013 June 27th 1844. Seems to me that from then on everything changed.
Stone holm Posted July 1, 2013 Author Posted July 1, 2013 June 27th 1844. Seems to me that from then on everything changed.Hm what about D & C 138 that reads close to the old format?
The Nehor Posted July 1, 2013 Posted July 1, 2013 At what point in our Church History did the form of revelation change from The Lord making declarations to the Prophet, to something looking more like business memorandums?I will let you know as soon as it happens. 3
Stone holm Posted July 1, 2013 Author Posted July 1, 2013 I will let you know as soon as it happens.Please do and be sure to send me a memo or better yet an official declaration.
canard78 Posted July 1, 2013 Posted July 1, 2013 Hm what about D & C 138 that reads close to the old format?Yes I guess so. That's a little more 'in his own words' - but you're right that it maintains an element of the 'supernatural'. 136 is BY's canonised words... more a set of moving instructions. I think what you're getting at is how these days it's more likely for the newsroom to clarify a point than the prophet. The statement on caffeine seems a good example.
canard78 Posted July 1, 2013 Posted July 1, 2013 Please do and be sure to send me a memo or better yet an official declaration.A link to a press release would do. The official spokesperson of the church apparently doesn't need to be sustained anymore.
Stone holm Posted July 1, 2013 Author Posted July 1, 2013 Yes I guess so. That's a little more 'in his own words' - but you're right that it maintains an element of the 'supernatural'. 136 is BY's canonised words... more a set of moving instructions. I think what you're getting at is how these days it's more likely for the newsroom to clarify a point than the prophet. The statement on caffeine seems a good example.We kind of discussed this a little in an adult education class about the manner in which Pres Kimball went about the extension of the Priesthood revelation. I can understand the need for consensus building in a huge bureaucracy. I notice how the Vatican seems to keep having to rein in Pope Francis. I suppose it is inevitable once a Church reaches a certain size...am just partial to the pre business model style... I guess.
Stone holm Posted July 1, 2013 Author Posted July 1, 2013 A link to a press release would do. The official spokesperson of the church apparently doesn't need to be sustained anymore.Given his last press statement on Prop 8, I would hope somebody is watching what he says before he says it though.
volgadon Posted July 1, 2013 Posted July 1, 2013 1844? Try 1830. As Leonard Arrington wrote, "a considerable part, if not the bulk, of the "revealed" scripture of the Mormons dealt with temporalities." 1
Stone holm Posted July 1, 2013 Author Posted July 1, 2013 1844? Try 1830. As Leonard Arrington wrote, "a considerable part, if not the bulk, of the "revealed" scripture of the Mormons dealt with temporalities."Meaning?
cdowis Posted July 1, 2013 Posted July 1, 2013 It never "changed", but only appears so because of the recording and publishing of so many formal revelations during that period. The "informal" revelations were ongoing as wel, but, as is the case today, generally not published. So, for me the real issue is why there are fewer formal revelations. My conclusion is that the church was, to use the popular phrase, on "training wheels" during those early years. They were still struggling with the basics, such as who is the ultimate temporal authority in the church. (the Hiram Paige incident)
Stone holm Posted July 1, 2013 Author Posted July 1, 2013 (edited) It never "changed", but only appears so because of the recording and publishing of so many formal revelations during that period. The "informal" revelations were ongoing as wel, but, as is the case today, generally not published. So, for me the real issue is why there are fewer formal revelations. My conclusion is that the church was, to use the popular phrase, on "training wheels" during those early years. They were still struggling with the basics, such as who is the ultimate temporal authority in the church. (the Hiram Paige incident)Possibly. But it does give the perception that something has changed. We put away the stone, declared that a more superstitious age and started issuing memos. Edited July 1, 2013 by Stone holm
janderich Posted July 1, 2013 Posted July 1, 2013 It never "changed", but only appears so because of the recording and publishing of so many formal revelations during that period. The "informal" revelations were ongoing as wel, but, as is the case today, generally not published.So, for me the real issue is why there are fewer formal revelations. My conclusion is that the church was, to use the popular phrase, on "training wheels" during those early years. They were still struggling with the basics, such as who is the ultimate temporal authority in the church. (the Hiram Paige incident)This thinking seems to somewhat contradict the 9th Article of Faith wherin we say, "We believe all that God has revealed, all that He does now reveal, and we believe that He will yet reveal many great and important things pertaining to the Kingdom of God". Are there no more great and important things to reveal?
Stone holm Posted July 1, 2013 Author Posted July 1, 2013 This thinking seems to somewhat contradict the 9th Article of Faith wherin we say, "We believe all that God has revealed, all that He does now reveal, and we believe that He will yet reveal many great and important things pertaining to the Kingdom of God". Are there no more great and important things to reveal?I don't want to put words in cdowis' mouth, but I think she is saying that the volume slacks off once you have the Church established, course that could also be translated set in its way and having established a particular culture. i think it possibly has more to do with the size of the Church bureaucracy, the development of politics within the bureaucracy, and the tendency towards inertia and conservatism in mature Churches. It is also is in keeping with our middle-class businessman image -- the age of prophets being the voice crying from the wilderness to make straight the paths of the Lord kind of morphs into something less radical and more sanitary.
canard78 Posted July 1, 2013 Posted July 1, 2013 I don't want to put words in cdowis' mouth, but I think she is saying that the volume slacks off once you have the Church established, course that could also be translated set in its way and having established a particular culture. i think it possibly has more to do with the size of the Church bureaucracy, the development of politics within the bureaucracy, and the tendency towards inertia and conservatism in mature Churches. It is also is in keeping with our middle-class businessman image -- the age of prophets being the voice crying from the wilderness to make straight the paths of the Lord kind of morphs into something less radical and more sanitary.Cdowis is a she???
janderich Posted July 1, 2013 Posted July 1, 2013 I don't want to put words in cdowis' mouth, but I think she is saying that the volume slacks off once you have the Church established, course that could also be translated set in its way and having established a particular culture. i think it possibly has more to do with the size of the Church bureaucracy, the development of politics within the bureaucracy, and the tendency towards inertia and conservatism in mature Churches. It is also is in keeping with our middle-class businessman image -- the age of prophets being the voice crying from the wilderness to make straight the paths of the Lord kind of morphs into something less radical and more sanitary. Does the volume of revelation really slack off at some point? Or does the Lord, when we are worthy, direct the revelation to the individual? I also question what we mean by established. We are not yet a Zion people. Perhaps we have become to easily satisfied and thus receive very little revelation either personally or as a church.
Tacenda Posted July 1, 2013 Posted July 1, 2013 (edited) I don't want to put words in cdowis' mouth, but I think she is saying that the volume slacks off once you have the Church established, course that could also be translated set in its way and having established a particular culture. i think it possibly has more to do with the size of the Church bureaucracy, the development of politics within the bureaucracy, and the tendency towards inertia and conservatism in mature Churches. It is also is in keeping with our middle-class businessman image -- the age of prophets being the voice crying from the wilderness to make straight the paths of the Lord kind of morphs into something less radical and more sanitary.It does feel there is something missing but I agree with cdowis, it's not like what the first group of LDS experienced, they being in the dawn of religion. We've just hit the point of night, so to speak, in the religion. The work of setting it all up is finished or nearly finished. Each day brings a few new revelations, how the prophet and his counselors or the 12 apostles get them may still be from God as He can't physically run our church, people do. Just as He can't in 98% or more of the other faiths out there I'm assuming.I may not believe ours is the only true church in the world, but do believe it has alot of truth that is so good. And "good" people getting insight or revelation. Revelation may not be earth shattering, and may not prevent tsunamis, earthquakes, disasters of all kinds, but good people are there to pull others out of devestating situations, and to me that is God whispering to us. Or the other two Gods beside Him.Note: I didn't know 'cdowis' was a woman, maybe I should be reading more profiles on this board!ETA: Cdowis is not a woman, I checked his profile! Edited July 1, 2013 by Tacenda
The Nehor Posted July 1, 2013 Posted July 1, 2013 This thinking seems to somewhat contradict the 9th Article of Faith wherin we say, "We believe all that God has revealed, all that He does now reveal, and we believe that He will yet reveal many great and important things pertaining to the Kingdom of God". Are there no more great and important things to reveal?There are many and saints are getting them revealed to themselves all the time. General distribution? Well, that has to wait until the saints as a whole are ready.
Stone holm Posted July 1, 2013 Author Posted July 1, 2013 Does the volume of revelation really slack off at some point? Or does the Lord, when we are worthy, direct the revelation to the individual? I also question what we mean by established. We are not yet a Zion people. Perhaps we have become to easily satisfied and thus receive very little revelation either personally or as a church.Well except only one person is authorized to receive and publish revelation for the whole Church, topic is not discussing individual revelation, what we are talking about is the format of prophetic revelation for the Church, which appears to have changed from the Lord giving a monologue or a specific graphic vision to the Prophet and the Prophet declaring it and it being published, to something else -- at least that is the perception. 1
volgadon Posted July 1, 2013 Posted July 1, 2013 Meaning?Meaning that the "business memo" aspect was there from the very beginning, and is in fact an integral aspect of LDS revelation. Just consider how much of the D&C looks like minutes of a municipal council's meeting. 4
Stone holm Posted July 1, 2013 Author Posted July 1, 2013 Meaning that the "business memo" aspect was there from the very beginning, and is in fact an integral aspect of LDS revelation. Just consider how much of the D&C looks like minutes of a municipal council's meeting.Not really. Some seem to deal with mundane administrative topics, that, as i understand it, was due to the early members having more faith in revelations than in Joseph Smith -- a distinction which some Mormons may have lost sight of as time has gone by. The Jews eventually replaced Prophets with teachers.
volgadon Posted July 1, 2013 Posted July 1, 2013 Not really. Some seem to deal with mundane administrative topics, that, as i understand it, was due to the early members having more faith in revelations than in Joseph Smith -- a distinction which some Mormons may have lost sight of as time has gone by.That is not it at all.http://ldsfaq.byu.edu/viewEM.aspx?number=68From their beginnings Latter-day Saints have regarded economic welfare as an indispensable part of religion. An 1830 revelation received by Joseph Smith stated, "Verily I say unto you, that all things unto me are spiritual, and not at any time have I given unto you a law which was temporal" (D&C 29:34–35). Accepted as part of the revealed word of God, this principle implied that every aspect of life had to do with spirituality and things eternal. For President Brigham Young, who led the Church in the West for thirty years, this revelation meant that "in the mind of God there is no such a thing as dividing spiritual from temporal, or temporal from spiritual; for they are one in the Lord" (JD 11:18).We cannot talk about spiritual things without connecting with them temporal things, neither can we talk about temporal things without connecting spiritual things with them…. We, as Latter-day Saints, really expect, look for and we will not be satisfied with anything short of being governed and controled by the word of the Lord in all of our acts, both spiritual and temporal. If we do not live for this, we do not live to be one with Christ [JD 10:329]. The Jews eventually replaced Prophets with teachers.A little more complicated, but a different topic for a different time. 2
Recommended Posts