Jesus Christ Personal Visits

[Brian 2.0]

You're using circular reasoning here. Set aside for just a moment what the scriptures and prophets say on the subject and look at it from a logical perspective. Let's say an investigator kneels down to pray to know the truthfulness of the gospel. While praying a light fills the room and a being appears, identifying himself as Christ and confirms that the church is true. The experience was so powerful and it all seemed so real, he could see him and feel his presence. Feeling confident what he has just experienced was real, but wanting confirmation it wasn't a dream or hallucination, he then proceeds to share the experience with the missionaries and members of the ward and they all relate similar stories about when they prayed for an answer.

Can you tell me that for the average person this experience wouldn't be more powerful than a witness of the spirit?

I'm with you on this.

Certainly there are still "did I just make that up" questions etc. but it's way easier than determining if that that good feeling I just had was the Holy Ghost or not. Couple that with others talking about the same experience an it's just a more verifiable event. Moroni's challenge would be easier to know that "it worked" if the end result was a personal visit from a deceased being. People have to deal with determining what was emotion and what was the spirit all the time, and people get it wrong. It'd be way easier to be confident that you just "had an experience" and harder to chalk it up to "emotion"

[Storm Rider]

I'm with you on this.

Certainly there are still "did I just make that up" questions etc. but it's way easier than determining if that that good feeling I just had was the Holy Ghost or not. Couple that with others talking about the same experience an it's just a more verifiable event. Moroni's challenge would be easier to know that "it worked" if the end result was a personal visit from a deceased being. People have to deal with determining what was emotion and what was the spirit all the time, and people get it wrong. It'd be way easier to be confident that you just "had an experience" and harder to chalk it up to "emotion"

I suggest you talk it up with God, he obviously has another plan than your recommendation.

[Tacenda]

When I speak of seeing Christ. I'm referring to him making a personal visit in our day. You have to admit a personal visit today in answer to prayer is different than than one of his contemporaries see him walk the streets of ancient Jerusalem.

Why did God and Christ personally visit Joseph in the sacred grove if a witness of the spirit would have been more powerful?

I am saying this despite it sounding dumb.  But don't we call the "First Vision" a vision?  Therefore maybe he saw it in a dreamlike state, not in actuality.  Thus, maybe this is how people see Christ, in the dream form vs. the physical.  I've read through several accounts online and it seems to be the story. 

[Brian 2.0]

I suggest you talk it up with God, he obviously has another plan than your recommendation.

I understand that. And that's obviously part of the plan. It's more work to understand the workings of the spirit and being able to indentify it and all that. You have to work on faith more

But we're not talking about what gods plan is, but what is more convincing. And I'm saying that seeing the resurrected Jesus in your room talking to you is pretty convincing, and I would guess more easily convincing than determining a witness from the Holy Ghost.

[omni]

I am saying this despite it sounding dumb.  But don't we call the "First Vision" a vision?  Therefore maybe he saw it in a dreamlike state, not in actuality.  Thus, maybe this is how people see Christ, in the dream form vs. the physical.  I've read through several accounts online and it seems to be the story.

I've never heard it described as a vision in the traditional sense. If so, then the church has got some 'splainin to do to.

[cinepro]

I was thinking of this whole Denver Snuffer stuff and it got me to thinking and wondering if Jesus Christ makes personal visits today, as in our time. I know of accounts from the early saints and others have made a variety of claims. I have no idea of these are legitimate but do you think he makes visits today?

 

 

When Grant Palmer made his claims about the "secret doubting" of the Apostles, I didn't buy it.  Likewise, unless they actually say otherwise, I won't assume something else about them based on conjecture and wishful thinking. 

[Questing Beast]

I've never heard it described as a vision in the traditional sense. If so, then the church has got some 'splainin to do to.

Not at all. JS himself called it a "vision", and said he came to himself on his back gazing into heaven. Why "the Church" teaches that the first vision and others were experiences that engaged the five senses in the physical world is the troubling part for me....

[inquiringmind]

Delete.

Edited September 9, 2013 by inquiringmind

[russianwolfe]

Imagine if He, rather than the Holy Ghost appeared to everyone that sincerely prayed about the church. There would be lines of people waiting to be baptized, we'd have tens of millions if not billions of members. So often in the church we take as gospel truth something a leader or the scriptures say without actually analyzing it to see if it actually makes sense.

 I disagree. Many would resent the Lord interfering in their lives.

 

If the Lord were to appear after so little effort on the part of the prayer, would that not cheapen the experience? I think it would. And if any who received that witness then turned against it (remember the events following the Kirkland Temple dedication), they would then fall under condemnation, as in no forgiveness of sins.

 

There is a spiritual progression from the glimmer of faith that leads one to ask in prayer for knowledge to the clear and unmistakable visitation of the Lord himself. To jump to the end of that progression would condemn more than it would save.

 

And I don't think it would lead to millions of baptisms. What happened when Elijah challenged the priest of Baal? Did Israel repent and follow the Law of Moses as they should have? I don't get that from what the scriptures say.

 

I also recall a scripture. After talking about the miracles that will follow those that believe in the Gospel and Christ as preached by the early LDS missionaries, the Lord states in D&C 82: 73 But a commandment I give unto them, that they shall not boast themselves of these things, neither speak them before the world; for these things are given unto you for your profit and for salvation. If the simple miracles of those who believe and are converted to the truth is given a commandment like this, how much more of a restraint would the Lord put on a personal visit?

 

Marvin

[Hamba Tuhan]

And I'm saying that seeing the resurrected Jesus in your room talking to you is pretty convincing, and I would guess more easily convincing than determining a witness from the Holy Ghost.

 

I'm assuming you're merely guessing here. Nevertheless, I have found that the most convincing evidence is the kind that I can experience repeatedly.

 

I've never heard it described as a vision in the traditional sense. If so, then the church has got some 'splainin to do to.

 

Wait, you've never before heard the First Vision described as a 'vision'???

[MormonMason]

You're using circular reasoning here. Set aside for just a moment what the scriptures and prophets say on the subject and look at it from a logical perspective. Let's say an investigator kneels down to pray to know the truthfulness of the gospel. While praying a light fills the room and a being appears, identifying himself as Christ and confirms that the church is true. The experience was so powerful and it all seemed so real, he could see him and feel his presence. Feeling confident what he has just experienced was real, but wanting confirmation it wasn't a dream or hallucination, he then proceeds to share the experience with the missionaries and members of the ward and they all relate similar stories about when they prayed for an answer.

Can you tell me that for the average person this experience wouldn't be more powerful than a witness of the spirit?

It would be powerful at first but then fade over time.  The Holy Ghost makes a more lasting impression.  I've spoken with Jesus Christ and heard the voice of the Father but ended up lapsing to inactivity for a time in spite of all of it.  The Brother of Jared had the Lord visit him and talk with him in the cloud, and he ended up not praying for four years while sitting on the seashore, for which the Lord later castigated him.

 

Joseph Smith himself returned to his old ways after seeing Father and Son. According to an account from Oliver Cowdery in a Church newspaper, as told him by Joseph Smith, Joseph even came close to wondering whether there was a God at all until something happened that led him to pray again for another vision and received it.  (It might have been Reverend Lane's preaching and revival in the area that led Joseph to try again).  I think things got to him with ministers telling him it was all in his head and/or of the Devil for so long, especially Reverend Lane, whom he had counted as a friend.

 

As an aside I so wish Reverend Lane's early 1820s diary could be found again.  There might well have been some relevant stuff in that diary.  Unfortunately, the last person to use it for research never returned it and it was lost.

 

There is something to be said about the fact that Jesus taught that those are blessed who have not seen and yet believed.  Or, to quote him directly from the scriptures:

 

 

27  Then saith he to Thomas, Reach hither thy finger, and behold my hands; and reach hither thy hand, and thrust it into my side: and be not faithless, but believing.

28  And Thomas answered and said unto him, My Lord and my God.

29  Jesus saith unto him, Thomas, because thou hast seen me, thou hast believed: blessed are they that have not seen, and yet have believed.

(John 20:27-29)

Edited September 9, 2013 by MormonMason

[SamIam]

When I was in the MTC, Elder McConkie spoke to us on Christmas Day. This was 1984, the year before he died. I have my notes from his talk. He said, "It so happens that I have a perfect knowledge that He (Christ) is the Son of God."

I was in the MTC for the same talk...If I may ask, Where did you serve?

[ERMD]

I went to Argentina Buenos Aires North mission. I was in the MTC from the second week of November 1984 until the second week of January 1985. The change back to 2 year missions was announced when I was there, so I was in the group of missionaries who got to choose any length between 18 and 24 months (you too, I guess).

[cinepro]

When I was in the MTC, Elder McConkie spoke to us on Christmas Day. This was 1984, the year before he died. I have my notes from his talk. He said, "It so happens that I have a perfect knowledge that He (Christ) is the Son of God."

 

Keep in mind that McConkie described the revelation for OD 2 in such a way that President Kimball thought it was too "literal", and asked him to not use that wording.  So it's possible that the way he worded his own experiences was possibly a reflection on the way he understood such things, apart from being an accurate description of the event itself.

 

 

President Kimball desired that people not sensationalize the revelatory experience. "Some people would try to figure it out that I had a personal visitation from the Almighty as in the First Vision. I would not want to make the revelation different from what it was." Still, he had no doubts that he had received a revelation and that its source was divine. The strong, distinct, sacred impression he experienced banished for him the thought of questioning its source.

Speaking to seminary and institute teachers a few months after the revelation, Elder McConkie described the events in poetic language that some misunderstood. He said of the experience:

"From the midst of Eternity, the voice of God, conveyed by the power of the Spirit, spoke to his prophet...And we all heard the same voice, received the same message, and became personal witnesses that the word received was the mind and will and voice of the Lord.

"President Kimball's prayer was answered and our prayers were answered. He heard the voice and we heard the same voice."

His ecstatic phrasing left some with the mistaken impression that the group had heard an audible voice speaking specific words. When President Kimball read the talk as published in 1981, he asked Elder McConkie to revise the statement to avoid possible misunderstanding.*

*Alexander B. Morrison equates Elder McConkie using the phrase "voice of the Lord" with Enos's experience, but Elder McConkie said he did not experience a "voice in the mind" as Enos did. The change President Kimball recommended was not made.

"Lengthen Your Stride: The Presidency of Spencer W. Kimball", Edward Kimball, p.234.

Edited September 9, 2013 by cinepro

[Brian 2.0]

I'm assuming you're merely guessing here. Nevertheless, I have found that the most convincing evidence is the kind that I can experience repeatedly.

 

I guess I'm saying that IF an apostle's "special witness" is seeing the resurrected Jesus, then I would assume that witness is MORE convincing somehow of the reality of the resurrected Jesus.

 

If it's not, than it's an odd "special witness" -- The apostles are testifying of a special witness (visitation) that is actually less convincing than a holy ghost witness?

 

If someone wants to say that a visitation is less convincing than a witness of the Holy Ghost, than it would make sense that the "special witness" is a special witness from Holy Ghost, and not a visitation.

[SargentYork]

By the way, I have no doubt but what the Lord still reveals Himself to individual Saints in a personal and sacred manner ... though I still don't know what you meant earlier by the phrase 'in the flesh', and you've ignored my request for clarification.

 

Since we're told that the Father and the Son have bodies of flesh and bone, I would assume he means "in the flesh."

 

The same way I might see you at the breakfast table if I lived in your house.

 

The same way doubting Thomas saw the risen Christ a week after Easter, when he reached out and touched His wounds.

 

Similar things happen all the time. Earlier this year I accompanied one of our new converts to the temple as he received his endowment. His first prayer about the truthfulness of the Book of Mormon was answered by the appearance of three men. Why do you think he chose to accept this experience as a valid answer to his prayer and not just something his mind had concocted?

 

I don't think he could have seen The Father, The Son, and The Holy Ghost in the flesh, because we're told that The Holy Ghost doesn't have a body of flesh.

 

But did he say who these three men were?

 

If they were Peter, James, and John (or the three Nephites), and they appeared out of nowhere, maybe he accepted it as more than a flight of fancy because they appeared in the flesh, and he was able to reach out and touch them?

 

If he actually did see the Trinity in a vision, or dream, maybe chose to accept the experience as a valid answer to his prayer because he had the internal witness of The Spirit?

 

Did he tell you who the three men were, and if it was a vision or a dream, and if he received some kind of internal witness?

[LordUther]

I think what a lot of people are forgetting is that without the testifying fire of the Holy Ghost a divine manifestation means nothing. A personage may appear before you and tell you that he is Jesus but how do you know? The personage may have holes in his hands and feet...but this is a supernatural being how do you know they are the crucifixion marks and not something this being has altered about them self to fool you? Because the Holy Ghost burns within you & testifies to you that it is so. Even a divine manifestation without the Holy Ghost means nothing!! Why does the Saviour not make a personal visitation to answer the prayer of every investigator to ascertain the validity of the BoM? Because we have been sent here to live by faith, to find out wether will we do what is right because it is right, not because we have been told by our Father to do it. I have told of my reconversion story here before, would an appearance by the Saviour been more effective? I doubt it, it may have got my obedience but only the fire of the Holy Ghost could've wrought the internal change that was required.

[Brian 2.0]

I think what a lot of people are forgetting is that without the testifying fire of the Holy Ghost a divine manifestation means nothing. A personage may appear before you and tell you that he is Jesus but how do you know? The personage may have holes in his hands and feet...but this is a supernatural being how do you know they are the crucifixion marks and not something this being has altered about them self to fool you? Because the Holy Ghost burns within you & testifies to you that it is so. Even a divine manifestation without the Holy Ghost means nothing!! Why does the Saviour not make a personal visitation to answer the prayer of every investigator to ascertain the validity of the BoM? Because we have been sent here to live by faith, to find out wether will we do what is right because it is right, not because we have been told by our Father to do it. I have told of my reconversion story here before, would an appearance by the Saviour been more effective? I doubt it, it may have got my obedience but only the fire of the Holy Ghost could've wrought the internal change that was required.

 

But there is room for witnesses and testimony that does not include the Holy Ghost.  The testimony of the 8 witnesses of the gold plates was not a Holy Ghost testimony, but a purely nuts-and-bolts "we saw the plates, handled them, etc."  There was no mention of witnesses of the Holy Ghost in that statement, just -- the plates are real.  Obviously that meant something, enough for it to be recorded and included in our scriptures.

[omni]

I have felt the spirit every bit as strong watching a Hollywood movie, listening to a secular song or watching my child's performance as I ever had in church, the temple or on my mission. This causes confusion that then turns to doubt.

I have heard many people describe receiving a spiritual confirmation for their religious views that are identical to how we receive our confirmations.

There are many, many people who have asked, who have pleaded with the Lord to know if the church is true and have received no response or a negative response. I also know of many people who did receive a confirmation of the Holy Ghost, yet still feel away.

Now please tell me how many sane rational people you know who have had Christ appear to them during a poignant moment in a film. Outside of the scriptures, how many sane rational people do you know that have seen Christ and then fell away?

[The Nehor]

N

Now please tell me how many sane rational people you know who have had Christ appear to them during a poignant moment in a film. Outside of the scriptures, how many sane rational people do you know that have seen Christ and then fell away?

Comparison does not work due to different sample sizes. Most people who see the Savior are getting the Second Comforter and have lived off the Holy Ghost testimony for years.

You would need a sample of those who saw Christ without the Holy Ghost being involved at all to test your theory. I don't know of such an event. Do you?

[omni]

Comparison does not work due to different sample sizes. Most people who see the Savior are getting the Second Comforter and have lived off the Holy Ghost testimony for years.

You would need a sample of those who saw Christ without the Holy Ghost being involved at all to test your theory. I don't know of such an event. Do you?

It would be impossible to know the percentage of those who have seen Christ and then fell away. However we do know that with the confirmation by the Holy Ghost about 2/3 of the members are inactive. If this method is so powerful and reliable why the abysmal activity rate?

[The Nehor]

It would be impossible to know the percentage of those who have seen Christ and then fell away. However we do know that with the confirmation by the Holy Ghost about 2/3 of the members are inactive. If this method is so powerful and reliable why the abysmal activity rate?

Becuase it is only powerful and reliable when you follow it which is, of course, hard. If you stray it weakens and dies. It was designed that way.

[Calm]

However we do know that with the confirmation by the Holy Ghost about 2/3 of the members are inactive.

I don't think that we can assume that all who are given the Gift, actually receive it.  I would hope so, but not sure how that could even be demonstrated.

 

I have felt the spirit every bit as strong watching a Hollywood movie, listening to a secular song or watching my child's performance as I ever had in church, the temple or on my mission.

 

Honest question, if you have felt it as strongly in such situations, then how can you be certain it is the Spirit and not an emotional or something else reaction?  Is there any difference in your believed experience of the Spirit in a spiritual context and when it happened in a secular one (assuming there was no spiritual significance to the song)?

[inquiringmind]

It would be powerful at first but then fade over time.  The Holy Ghost makes a more lasting impression.  I've spoken with Jesus Christ and heard the voice of the Father but ended up lapsing to inactivity for a time in spite of all of it.  The Brother of Jared had the Lord visit him and talk with him in the cloud, and he ended up not praying for four years while sitting on the seashore, for which the Lord later castigated him.

 

Joseph Smith himself returned to his old ways after seeing Father and Son. According to an account from Oliver Cowdery in a Church newspaper, as told him by Joseph Smith, Joseph even came close to wondering whether there was a God at all until something happened that led him to pray again for another vision and received it.  (It might have been Reverend Lane's preaching and revival in the area that led Joseph to try again).  I think things got to him with ministers telling him it was all in his head and/or of the Devil for so long, especially Reverend Lane, whom he had counted as a friend.

 

As an aside I so wish Reverend Lane's early 1820s diary could be found again.  There might well have been some relevant stuff in that diary.  Unfortunately, the last person to use it for research never returned it and it was lost.

 

There is something to be said about the fact that Jesus taught that those are blessed who have not seen and yet believed.  Or, to quote him directly from the scriptures:

 

I would find it comforting if Joseph doubted God and was forgiven, even after the first vision.

 

What paper was this?

 

Was Cowdery a friend or foe when he told this story?

 

And was Joseph still alive?

[omni]

Honest question, if you have felt it as strongly in such situations, then how can you be certain it is the Spirit and not an emotional or something else reaction?  Is there any difference in your believed experience of the Spirit in a spiritual context and when it happened in a secular one (assuming there was no spiritual significance to the song)?

This is precisely my point, we are taught to base our entire eternal salvation on a feeling or experience that can be replicated by watching a Hollywood film. In my experience (and I've heard similar stories from many others) the sensations I felt during these secular activities were identical to the spirit I felt on my mission watching an investigator get baptized.

Recently I had a conversation with a friend of mine who was going through a faith crisis. After reading some of the more troubling aspects about polygamy, he decided he needed to kneel down in prayer and ask God about it. He received, in his words an "undeniable" answer that polygamy was wrong. This friend is a life long member, RM, who was married in the temple-he knows how to recognize the spirit. So was this an "undeniable" answer from God, or was he confused? My point is that spiritual witnesses from the Holy Ghost are often unreliable.