Should God Make Sure That Stuff Stays "true"?

[california boy]

They are just human after all and not angelic or divine messengers.

 

 

The answer lies within our own Articles of Faith.

Article of Faith #9: 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.

 

 

Why do you insist on your Bishop, Stake President, or the General Authorities of the Church being infallible? 

These are all questions that have bothered me.  But the real question is what does it mean to be a prophet, seer and revelatory.  When you read the history of Joseph Smith, it seems like he was able to receive a direct answer from God on a regular basis.  Paul writes letters to the Ephesians etc and every word is taken to be from the mouth of God.  Prophets throughout history seemed to have a direct line to God, yet none of these absolute connection with God seems to be a part of the church any longer.  As far as I can tell, the last revelation from God himself came in 1978.  

 

Why doesn't God reveal more?  Why is truth not always found in His church because it's leaders are forced to make their best guess as to what is true?  What is the value of having a prophet lead the church when revelations from God seem to be an event that only happens every 30 or 50 years?  When we say God leads the church, what does that actually mean?  When we have a church lead by a chosen prophet of God, isn't it reasonable that the prophet gets to ask God some very basic questions once a year? Once every 5 years?  Heck, I would be happy if the prophet could meet with God every 10 years.  If not, is there really any value in having a prophet of God lead the church?  Couldn't the leader just be a good man that is righteous enough to receive the Holy Ghost and have good judgement? 

 

I don't mean at all for this post to question anyone's faith or belief in the prophet.  I am just asking what it means in our day to be a prophet, seer and revelator. Or maybe more to the point, are the heavens silent once again except on extremely rare occasions?

[Bill “Papa” Lee]

I was having a conversation with my wife after some show about archaeology that featured 10,000 year old humanoid fossils. This discussion led to 6,000 year old Biblical history and how to rationalize the scripture with science.  I did my best to offer my views that reconcile apparent contradictions.

 

A bit surprisingly to me, my wife was not bothered by the doctrinal explanations, but by the fact that many of the manuals, institute teachers, church culture, etc. seem to perpetuate young earth concepts and interpretation that mislead the youth (and adults) into falsehoods and faith crises.  "If this is the true church", she asked "then why does the Lord permit the continual teaching of untruths?"  The word "true" is among the most used words in the LDS vocabulary and her concern was that the word had no validity, or that we could not rightly claim to be "true" if there is no attempt to correct or at least stop perpetuating teachings that weren't ... well... true.  If we don't see some guidance or direction in these types of things, then what prevents our eventual apostasy?  What makes us any more true than any other church?

 

These are the types of questions that came up.  I am working through my thoughts on answering them, but I would welcome some insights.

The scriptures are for doctrine or theology, if you prefer this definition. So the Bible is not meant as a science book, nor our classes science classes. As far as The Lord making sure these things stay truth; truth simply is and truth that is to be taught is what scripture reflects, but that does not always mean every word spoken or written are dates and facts alone, but how they were written.

[SeekingUnderstanding]

The scriptures are for doctrine or theology, if you prefer this definition. So the Bible is not meant as a science book, nor our classes science classes. As far as The Lord making sure these things stay truth; truth simply is and truth that is to be taught is what scripture reflects, but that does not always mean every word spoken or written are dates and facts alone, but how they were written.

If you read trim carefully, his wife had no problem with the scriptures.  It was the interpretation of scripture perpetuated in official church publications, manuals etc. etc.

[ERayR]

These are all questions that have bothered me.  But the real question is what does it mean to be a prophet, seer and revelatory.  When you read the history of Joseph Smith, it seems like he was able to receive a direct answer from God on a regular basis.  Paul writes letters to the Ephesians etc and every word is taken to be from the mouth of God.  Prophets throughout history seemed to have a direct line to God, yet none of these absolute connection with God seems to be a part of the church any longer.  As far as I can tell, the last revelation from God himself came in 1978.  

 

Why doesn't God reveal more?  Why is truth not always found in His church because it's leaders are forced to make their best guess as to what is true?  What is the value of having a prophet lead the church when revelations from God seem to be an event that only happens every 30 or 50 years?  When we say God leads the church, what does that actually mean?  When we have a church lead by a chosen prophet of God, isn't it reasonable that the prophet gets to ask God some very basic questions once a year? Once every 5 years?  Heck, I would be happy if the prophet could meet with God every 10 years.  If not, is there really any value in having a prophet of God lead the church?  Couldn't the leader just be a good man that is righteous enough to receive the Holy Ghost and have good judgement? 

 

I don't mean at all for this post to question anyone's faith or belief in the prophet.  I am just asking what it means in our day to be a prophet, seer and revelator. Or maybe more to the point, are the heavens silent once again except on extremely rare occasions?

 

I will address your concerns with what I understand and what works for me.

1)  The last known publicly proclaimed revelation was 1978. I have reason to believe that there are revelations received that are not yet publicly proclaimed as such but instead are presented in the form of admonition and in private to certain people.

 

2)  Why are you not seeking out of the best books and actively seeking personal revelation? 

 

3) Joseph Smith was a unique case.  He receive specific revelation for the restoration and for specific peoples role in implementing the restoration.  The restoration was accomplished and we are now in an occasional course correction phase.  From Joseph Smith on through we are admonished to get personal revelation.  The essential are there.  If you want the mysteries it is a personal quest not a general revelation from SLC. 

 

4)  IMNSHO the heavens are opened at least every six months and it is up to us to get our own directions to make it personal.

[Bill “Papa” Lee]

If you read trim carefully, his wife had no problem with the scriptures.  It was the interpretation of scripture perpetuated in official church publications, manuals etc. etc.

Which is my point...she may be OK with it, and he may not, because the items he addressed do not require consensus even amount Church leaders. If the truth he felt needing to made remain by God, is or was the divinity of Christ, his atonement, our relationship with God and so forth, my comments would have been completely different, but preserving dates, places via grid placement and things that have no bearing on our salvation...believe what you like, you will still be members in good standing.

[trim]

I guess it would help to understand what the misinterpretations are.  Are you talking about lousy lesson analogies (e.g., young women's virtue compared to a cupcake) or misleading pictures (e.g., Joseph translating the plates wearing the breastplate and urim & thummim) or harmful teachings from the past that just won't die (e.g., blacks less valient in the pre-existence) or something else?

I think all of your examples are good and perhaps an accumulation of such misinterpretations can lead to a point where we are no longer of firm ground.  There may be some minsinterpretations that are harmful on their own.  The literal interpretation of the Bible timeline was the one that started my wife's concern over how far can a considerable portion of the body of the church stray from correct principles before the church, (assuming a majority of the body of the church can constitue "the church") is incorrect, that is, not "true".  When it comes to misinterpreting one of the "Three pillars" of eternity, for example, it seems that there would be some limit to our straying before divine intervention would be appropriate.

[ERayR]

I think all of your examples are good and perhaps an accumulation of such misinterpretations can lead to a point where we are no longer of firm ground.  There may be some minsinterpretations that are harmful on their own.  The literal interpretation of the Bible timeline was the one that started my wife's concern over how far can a considerable portion of the body of the church stray from correct principles before the church, (assuming a majority of the body of the church can constitue "the church") is incorrect, that is, not "true".  When it comes to misinterpreting one of the "Three pillars" of eternity, for example, it seems that there would be some limit to our straying before divine intervention would be appropriate.

 

One must consider rather it is essential to ones salvation.  Is a 6,000 year timeline essential to salvation. I would argue that faith, repentance, baptism, Holy Ghost and the temple ordinances are the basics essentials to salvation.

Edited September 26, 2013 by ERayR

[CV75]

Or maybe more to the point, are the heavens silent once again except on extremely rare occasions?

Assuming this is the root of all your questions: no, they are not silent. Prophets, Seers and Revelators receive only what the Lord wants them to so that all His children can receive all He wants them to. For example, all that Joseph Smith received in his lifetime was so that we can have the Gift of the Holy Ghost attend us from the moment we receive it after baptism until we receive the Holy Spirit of Promise. The same with his successors. So the heavens are open continually to as many as will receive God's blessings and "commandmnets not a few," individually and collectively. Prophets, Seers and Revelators have their role, and the rest of us have ours, and revelation from heaven is not given only on rare occassions, but to all, and I'd say very frequently.

Edited September 26, 2013 by CV75

[trim]

These are all questions that have bothered me.  But the real question is what does it mean to be a prophet, seer and revelatory.  When you read the history of Joseph Smith, it seems like he was able to receive a direct answer from God on a regular basis.  Paul writes letters to the Ephesians etc and every word is taken to be from the mouth of God.  Prophets throughout history seemed to have a direct line to God, yet none of these absolute connection with God seems to be a part of the church any longer.  As far as I can tell, the last revelation from God himself came in 1978.  

 

Why doesn't God reveal more?  Why is truth not always found in His church because it's leaders are forced to make their best guess as to what is true?  What is the value of having a prophet lead the church when revelations from God seem to be an event that only happens every 30 or 50 years?  When we say God leads the church, what does that actually mean?  When we have a church lead by a chosen prophet of God, isn't it reasonable that the prophet gets to ask God some very basic questions once a year? Once every 5 years?  Heck, I would be happy if the prophet could meet with God every 10 years.  If not, is there really any value in having a prophet of God lead the church?  Couldn't the leader just be a good man that is righteous enough to receive the Holy Ghost and have good judgement? 

 

I don't mean at all for this post to question anyone's faith or belief in the prophet.  I am just asking what it means in our day to be a prophet, seer and revelator. Or maybe more to the point, are the heavens silent once again except on extremely rare occasions?

I think you captured my wife's concerns better than I did.

 

In my wife's case, these questions eat at the foundation of faith more than the specific doctrinal issues that may be misunderstood or misinterpreted.  In her case it was "What does it mean to say that we are members of the only true church?"

 

I have found that my studies and participation on this board have altered my views of God and the gospel significantly.  My belief and conviction to the gospel is stronger now than ever before, but my views are more open instead of rigid and I find myself in a position in which my faith and interpretation of scripture are far more personal than institutional.  However, this is not the case for everyone and it may take years to arrive at that point.  Some, like my wife, don't like to hear that there is untruth in what is supposed to be undeviatingly "true".  For my wife there is no crisis of faith, but she sure doesn't like it much.  For other members of my family there has been a crisis with consequences.  So, in some cases there would be value in making sure that stuff that is supposed to be true stays true.

[Robert F. Smith]

If history tells one story that has physical evidence and documentation to support it and religion tells another story there exists 2 truths. One actual truth and one figurative truth. Be little concerned with the figurative truth...it reads like an awful Shel Silverstein book.

Careful, Valentinus.  Shel Silverstein was a very wise man who reflected our often cockeyed world back at us.

And, there is only one truth (= reality), which can be described via equations or via allegory and poetry, but it is always the same truth;.

[Robert F. Smith]

Just to be clear, a husband and wife do not have authority to receive any revelation that goes against their Bishop, Stake President, or the General Authorities of the Church.

 

So my wife and I can receive revelation about whether or not we should move to Kentucky, or whether the kids should be homeschooled or go to public school.  But we can't receive revelation about the location of Ward boundaries, who the Elder's Quorum President should be, whether Saturday or Sunday should be the "Sabbath", or whether or not the Apostles and official Church publications are correct in their teachings, including those about the age and origin of mankind.

Brother Brigham thought somewhat differently.  He suggested that the Saints need to know for themselves whether brother X is led by God.  How can a Mormon sustain any of his leaders unless the Holy Spirit has confirmed for him that the leaders and their policies are of God.  He didn't think that living on borrowed light was a good idea, and said so.

[CV75]

"What does it mean to say that we are members of the only true church?"

While each person must asses this on his own (see a talk by Elder Hinckley -- https://www.lds.org/general-conference/2006/04/repentance-a-blessing-of-membership?lang=eng), D&C 121:26-33 gives a great deal to contemplate.

[rpn]

But science is fickle.  In my lifetime, science has changed what it perceives as truth on more than one topic.  We cannot know whether our current scientific understanding is actual truth, therefore we should not be challenging faith on the basis of what the present knowledge of science is..

[trim]

One must consider rather it is essential to ones salvation.  Is a 6,000 year timeline essential to salvation. I would argue that faith, repentance, baptism, Holy Ghost and the temple ordinances are the basics essentials to salvation.

For some doctrinal hang ups I would agree with you approach here.  However, the misunderstandings around creation mythology should probably be an exception given the centrality of the creation to our doctrine and its prominence in ancient and modern temple ritual.  When one tries to identify what makes the church "true" there is usually a discussion of restored truths including temple ritual and covenants.  If misinterpretation of the the creation mythology leads to doubt of its veracity and by connection doubt of the elements of temple worship that are built around the creation story, then it becomes a problem.  Sidestepping the creation timeline concern may jeopardize faith and participation in the temple ordinances.  So, from that perspective the creation doctrines may be uniquely important and allowing broad misunderstanding to persist can be dangerous.  This is at the heart of my wife's concern.

[california boy]

I will address your concerns with what I understand and what works for me.

 

I don't think you addressed any of my points at all. Either you don't understand my concerns or you don't see the need for revelation on some of these doctrinal issues that are frequently talked about on this board.  

 

1)  The last known publicly proclaimed revelation was 1978. I have reason to believe that there are revelations received that are not yet publicly proclaimed as such but instead are presented in the form of admonition and in private to certain people.

 

What the heck good is a direct revelation from God if no one knows about it.  I am not talking about individual revelation for individuals, I am talking about clearing up doctrinal questions that are eating away at the church.  The answers which would benefit the church in general.

 

2)  Why are you not seeking out of the best books and actively seeking personal revelation? 

 

Because I am not looking for the wisdom of men.  And I am not looking for answers to personal problems.  I am looking for doctrinal answers that would affect the whole church.  

 

3) Joseph Smith was a unique case.  He receive specific revelation for the restoration and for specific peoples role in implementing the restoration.  The restoration was accomplished and we are now in an occasional course correction phase.  From Joseph Smith on through we are admonished to get personal revelation.  The essential are there.  If you want the mysteries it is a personal quest not a general revelation from SLC. 

 

The restoration is still going on.  Not all doctrinal answers were given to Joseph Smith.  If that were the case, then why do we believe the 9th Article of Faith?  Why have a living prophet if he is only a figurehead.

 

 

4)  IMNSHO the heavens are opened at least every six months and it is up to us to get our own directions to make it personal.

 

God doesn't chat with the prophet every 6 months and the prophet relays what God has revealed to him at conference.  That is kinda the whole point of my post.  When is the last time you went to General Conference and the prophet announced a new revelation. Oh wait that would be 1978.  Do you not see a difference between a revelation of God and an opinion or expounded message from the bretheren?  

 

[california boy]

Assuming this is the root of all your questions: no, they are not silent. Prophets, Seers and Revelators receive only what the Lord wants them to so that all His children can receive all He wants them to. For example, all that Joseph Smith received in his lifetime was so that we can have the Gift of the Holy Ghost attend us from the moment we receive it after baptism until we receive the Holy Spirit of Promise. The same with his successors. So the heavens are open continually to as many as will receive God's blessings and "commandmnets not a few," individually and collectively. Prophets, Seers and Revelators have their role, and the rest of us have ours, and revelation from heaven is not given only on rare occassions, but to all, and I'd say very frequently.

Then what is the role of Prophets, Seers and Revelators if it is not to receive revelation from God?  Why not refer to them as "Top Administrators"  I has become completely clear that we can not rely on simply the opinions of general authorities.  There are too many examples of erroneous opinions and too many calls telling us of their fallibility.

[sweetpotatoh]

I was having a conversation with my wife after some show about archaeology that featured 10,000 year old humanoid fossils. This discussion led to 6,000 year old Biblical history and how to rationalize the scripture with science.  I did my best to offer my views that reconcile apparent contradictions.

 

A bit surprisingly to me, my wife was not bothered by the doctrinal explanations, but by the fact that many of the manuals, institute teachers, church culture, etc. seem to perpetuate young earth concepts and interpretation that mislead the youth (and adults) into falsehoods and faith crises.  "If this is the true church", she asked "then why does the Lord permit the continual teaching of untruths?"  The word "true" is among the most used words in the LDS vocabulary and her concern was that the word had no validity, or that we could not rightly claim to be "true" if there is no attempt to correct or at least stop perpetuating teachings that weren't ... well... true.  If we don't see some guidance or direction in these types of things, then what prevents our eventual apostasy?  What makes us any more true than any other church?

 

These are the types of questions that came up.  I am working through my thoughts on answering them, but I would welcome some insights.

 

 

I am reading a couple of books by Hugh Nibley that were lectures given at BYU from religion classes he was teaching. He states many times that the earth is oleder then 7,000 years and may have been used for other purposes and for other peoples.. As to why the church states that mankind is 6,000 years old I believe that modern man is between 6 and 7 thousand years old. What happened prior to Adam occured for other purposes that we aren't privy to. It is certainly food for thought.

Edited September 27, 2013 by sweetpotatoh

[Robert F. Smith]

For some doctrinal hang ups I would agree with you approach here.  However, the misunderstandings around creation mythology should probably be an exception given the centrality of the creation to our doctrine and its prominence in ancient and modern temple ritual.  When one tries to identify what makes the church "true" there is usually a discussion of restored truths including temple ritual and covenants.  If misinterpretation of the the creation mythology leads to doubt of its veracity and by connection doubt of the elements of temple worship that are built around the creation story, then it becomes a problem.  Sidestepping the creation timeline concern may jeopardize faith and participation in the temple ordinances.  So, from that perspective the creation doctrines may be uniquely important and allowing broad misunderstanding to persist can be dangerous.  This is at the heart of my wife's concern.

"Creation mythology" ought to be the operative phrase in our discussion.  The Brethren have repeatedly made it clear that the story of creation & Eden is figurative in nature.  Just so, it is not intended to be a scientific account, but is a ritual reflection of higher truths --- whatever those are.

 

You pretty much lose me when you insist that "Sidestepping the creation timeline concern may jeopardize faith and participation in the temple ordinances."   That is a non sequitur, and your wife may be overthinking it.

[sdc999]

  We must remember prophets are also products of their time.

Maybe they should start being products of the Lord's time instead of their time.

[ERayR]

Maybe they should start being products of the Lord's time instead of their time.

 

So you have a complaint about the way God does it?  Another that's not the way I would do it.

[CV75]

Then what is the role of Prophets, Seers and Revelators if it is not to receive revelation from God?

See https://www.lds.org/general-conference/2004/10/prophets-seers-and-revelators?lang=eng -- do you have issues with what is explained there?

 

Their role is certainly to receive revelation from God. Revelation comes in many ways and forms. For example, they receive the keys that allow them in turn to reveal things (instructions, ordinances, delegation, etc.) to us, which in turn allow us to receive revelation (enlightenment, sanctification, protection, etc.) ourselves, typically through the Gift of the Holy Ghost.

[thesometimesaint]

I think the point of the OP is that it would be cool if God would at least reveal to us the stuff the science already has.

 

Who says that God didn't inspire those scientists to reveal it?

Edited September 27, 2013 by thesometimesaint

[thesometimesaint]

Just to be clear, a husband and wife do not have authority to receive any revelation that goes against their Bishop, Stake President, or the General Authorities of the Church.

 

So my wife and I can receive revelation about whether or not we should move to Kentucky, or whether the kids should be homeschooled or go to public school.  But we can't receive revelation about the location of Ward boundaries, who the Elder's Quorum President should be, whether Saturday or Sunday should be the "Sabbath", or whether or not the Apostles and official Church publications are correct in their teachings, including those about the age and origin of mankind.

 

It is a two way street. I can't tell the Stake President where the Ward boundaries are to be, and he can't tell me where to move to.

 

To paraphrase The Church can tell me how to go to Heaven, but not how the heavens go.

[sdc999]

So you have a complaint about the way God does it?  Another that's not the way I would do it.

I have no complaints about anything God does.  But your comment infers that prophets are influenced by societies in which they live; thus, when they err, it is because of this rather that listening to the Lord's promptings.

[thesometimesaint]

We are all, including Prophets, influenced by the culture we live in. The truly wonderful things is the God still works with us anyway.