Miraculous Gifts Of The Apostles

[theplains]

I had a question about something mentioned on page 64 of "Mine Errand from the Lord" 

by Boyd K. Packer.

 

"The Lord told his Twelve Apostles that it was not only their privilege but their responsibility

to perform miracles. These miracles were signs. We don't seek after signs, but they are

attendant to the authority, and they are attendant in our day".

 

I see this from Matthew 10:1,8 and Mark 3:14-15.  The great signs and wonders are also

recorded for us in the Book of Acts.

 

While I can find no such commission given by Jesus in the Book of Mormon, I do see a

record in 4 Nephi 1:5 of the Nephite disciples having these sign gifts.  Is there any mention

of such a commission or some powerful miracles attributed to the twelve Mormon apostles

in the Doctrine and Covenants? If no, why would the Holy Spirit inspire the biblical writers

to mention this of their New Testament apostles?

 

Thanks,

Jim

[thesometimesaint]

 

I had a question about something mentioned on page 64 of "Mine Errand from the Lord" 

by Boyd K. Packer.

 

"The Lord told his Twelve Apostles that it was not only their privilege but their responsibility

to perform miracles. These miracles were signs. We don't seek after signs, but they are

attendant to the authority, and they are attendant in our day".

 

I see this from Matthew 10:1,8 and Mark 3:14-15.  The great signs and wonders are also

recorded for us in the Book of Acts.

 

While I can find no such commission given by Jesus in the Book of Mormon, I do see a

record in 4 Nephi 1:5 of the Nephite disciples having these sign gifts.  Is there any mention

of such a commission or some powerful miracles attributed to the twelve Mormon apostles

in the Doctrine and Covenants? If no, why would the Holy Spirit inspire the biblical writers

to mention this of their New Testament apostles?

 

Thanks,

Jim

 

 

The Book of Mormon, and the D&C are replete with miracles.

 

We today are more guarded in presenting our miracles to the world. Miracles don't convert any one. IE; Did the Priests of Pharaoh turning rods into snakes convert anyone?  For a NT example did the Resurrection of Jesus convert anyone, if so why isn't everyone a Christian?

Edited December 22, 2013 by thesometimesaint

[Duncan]

I gave a talk today on miracles, for good info read a talk by Elder Oaks of the 12 from 2000 called Miracles, it was given at a CES devotional in Calgary

Edited December 22, 2013 by Duncan

[3DOP]

Hi theplains.

 

I had a thread on this subject not long ago, but did not have time to keep it going.

It strengthens my certainty about the Catholic Church to discover that there are no public miracles associated with modern LDS Apostles nowadays. Just for a contrast with the LDS position policy on making miracles public, here is the defined Catholic position from the First Vatican Council:

Nevertheless, in order that the submission of our faith should be in accordance with reason, it was God's will that there should be linked to the internal assistance of the Holy Spirit external indications of his revelation, that is to say divine acts, and first and foremost miracles and prophecies, which clearly demonstrating as they do the omnipotence and infinite knowledge of God, are the most certain signs of revelation and are suited to the understanding of all. . Hence Moses and the prophets, and especially Christ our Lord himself, worked many absolutely clear miracles and delivered prophecies; while of the apostles we read: And they went forth and preached everywhere, while the Lord worked with them and confirmed the message by the signs that attended it

 

 

 

---Session Three, Chapter 3, para. 5, April 24, 1870

 

The third and fourth canons of those "On Faith" are also explicit about the role of miracles in the Catholic faith:

 

3. If anyone says that divine revelation cannot be made credible by external signs, and that therefore men and women ought to be moved to faith only by each one's internal experience or private inspiration: let him be anathema.

4. If anyone says that all miracles are impossible, and that therefore all reports of them, even those contained in Sacred Scripture, are to be set aside as fables or myths; or that miracles can never be known with certainty, nor can the divine origin of the Christian religion be proved from them: let him be anathema.

 

 

The best way to get rid of the value Catholics place on miracles is to say that God gives everybody miracles regardless of the message they preach. That way, miracles can't confirm anybody's message, including those mentioned in Mark 16. My problem with this is that it just ignores the scrutinizing care that the Church has directed at those claiming miracles. Anybody who reads the account of how the Grotto at Lourdes came to be, and the subsequent medical miracles without affirming that the Catholic Church deliberately conspired in an ongoing hoax will have to believe that Mary appeared to a young lady of limited mental capacity and revealed herself as the Immaculate Conception, a term this young lady could never have made up on her own. This is just one heavily documented case where there are ongoing miracles and for me, it is easier for me to believe that Mary is the Immaculate Conception, than that the Church worked out this hoax. If it was a hoax, not only are hundreds of prelates cooperating in a lie that would send them to Hell if they believe in the Church, but it also involved what amounted to making a young lady miserable because of their pretended disbelief of claims which they coached her to make! It just doesn't add up that way.

 

I understand that miracles can be hard to believe. But sometimes it surpasses credibility to believe that a particular claim was a hoax. I have a book with thousands of lesser known, but documented public miracles, that similarly involves the confirmation of the Catholic faith. Sometimes they confirm a doctrine, as with Eucharistic miracles, and other times they confirm the message and/or sanctity of a particular saint. Is it more credible to account for the astounding success St. Francis Xavier had in the Far East to the gift of tongues and raising souls back from from the dead, or that these people of a different culture and language just wanted to obey this odd looking man who allowed propagation of lies about himself who appeared from the West? Given the choices, either the Catholic Church is now and always has been profoundly subverted by people who successfully used tricks and lies to convince people of the Catholic faith, or these miracles really happened. I find it more credible to believe in miracles.  

Edited December 22, 2013 by 3DOP

[Storm Rider]

I appreciate what 3DOP has related about the perspective of the Catholic Church. I think at times we Latter-day Saints are a little too circumspect about talking about the miracles that occur in the Church yesterday and today. Whereas the CC has a process to study and verify the validity of miracles, we do not have such a process. They occur and more often than not they are for the edification of the individuals involved and not easily shared with others. 

 

Though I am familiar with healings occurring in the Church I think I more often hear of visions and spiritual manifestations (outside of a conversion process). 

 

What would it indicate to you to learn of miracles in the LDS Church?  When I read of some of the miraculous events that have occurred with the CC I take nothing away from it but gratitude that our Father in Heaven and the Holy Spirit are active in the lives of other Christians.  I do find it interesting how many of these miracles are centered around Marian veneration/experiences/visions. 

[strappinglad]

Not to mention the issue of Holy Relics and the miracles connected with them.

[CV75]

 

I had a question about something mentioned on page 64 of "Mine Errand from the Lord" 

by Boyd K. Packer.

 

"The Lord told his Twelve Apostles that it was not only their privilege but their responsibility

to perform miracles. These miracles were signs. We don't seek after signs, but they are

attendant to the authority, and they are attendant in our day".

 

I see this from Matthew 10:1,8 and Mark 3:14-15.  The great signs and wonders are also

recorded for us in the Book of Acts.

 

While I can find no such commission given by Jesus in the Book of Mormon, I do see a

record in 4 Nephi 1:5 of the Nephite disciples having these sign gifts.  Is there any mention

of such a commission or some powerful miracles attributed to the twelve Mormon apostles

in the Doctrine and Covenants? If no, why would the Holy Spirit inspire the biblical writers

to mention this of their New Testament apostles?

 

Thanks,

Jim

 

If you do a word search for “miracles” in the D&C, there seems to be no such commission. However, D&C 24:13-14 speaks of performing miracles “that the scriptures might be fulfilled; for ye shall do according to that which is written,” which seems to refer to the commission given in the New Testament.

 

According to this and the other references that come up in the search, it seems that in the dispensation of the fullness of times the original commission has been expanded. It seems from these references that miracles are performed only as commanded of the Lord; they are shown only to the believers; the power to perform them is given to those who receive Him; and, the working miracles is a gift of the spirit for the members.

 

D&C 24: 13; D&C 35: 8; D&C 45: 8; D&C 46: 21

 

So I think the difference is how miracles were administered by the Lord through His servants, His people, or both in prior dispensations and how He uses them in ours. I think we can come up with more than a few of the reasons for the differences.

[JLHPROF]

 

 

Is there any mention

of such a commission or some powerful miracles attributed to the twelve Mormon apostles

in the Doctrine and Covenants? If no, why would the Holy Spirit inspire the biblical writers

to mention this of their New Testament apostles?

 

 

 

 

D&C 84:63-73 is the closest thing, directed to both the apostles and the believers:

 

63 And as I said unto mine apostles, even so I say unto you, for you are mine ^aapostles, even God’s high priests; ye are they whom my Father hath ^bgiven me; ye are my ^cfriends;

64 Therefore, as I said unto mine apostles I say unto you again, that every ^asoul who ^bbelieveth on your words, and is baptized by water for the ^cremission of sins, shall ^dreceive the Holy Ghost.

65 And these ^asigns shall follow them that believe—

66 In my name they shall do many wonderful ^aworks;

67 In my ^aname they shall cast out devils;

68 In my name they shall ^aheal the sick;

69 In my name they shall ^aopen the eyes of the blind, and unstop the ears of the deaf;

70 And the tongue of the dumb shall speak;

71 And if any man shall administer ^apoison unto them it shall not hurt them;

72 And the ^apoison of a serpent shall not have power to harm them.

73 But a commandment I give unto them, that they shall not ^aboast themselves of these things, neither speak them before the world; for these things are given unto you for your profit and for salvation.

 

 

And as far as modern day apostles performing miracles, there are plenty of examples in Church History, my favorite being Joseph Smith's day of power in Nauvoo.

[3DOP]

I appreciate what 3DOP has related about the perspective of the Catholic Church. I think at times we Latter-day Saints are a little too circumspect about talking about the miracles that occur in the Church yesterday and today. Whereas the CC has a process to study and verify the validity of miracles, we do not have such a process. They occur and more often than not they are for the edification of the individuals involved and not easily shared with others. 

 

Though I am familiar with healings occurring in the Church I think I more often hear of visions and spiritual manifestations (outside of a conversion process). 

 

What would it indicate to you to learn of miracles in the LDS Church?  When I read of some of the miraculous events that have occurred with the CC I take nothing away from it but gratitude that our Father in Heaven and the Holy Spirit are active in the lives of other Christians.  I do find it interesting how many of these miracles are centered around Marian veneration/experiences/visions. 

 

Thanks Storm Rider.

 

But what do you think of my further reflections regarding the implications of the fact that the Catholic Church scrutinizes these investigations very closely? For your information, when Bernadette of Lourdes said the beautiful lady identfiied herself as the Immaculate Conception, it was in the same decade that Pius IX defined the dogma. Bernadette just didn't make it up. She was either coached or the Lady really told her what to say. That is why my opinion is that the Catholic Church can only come out of these miracle claims as the true Church or an institution of schemers and cads. 

 

Storm Rider, I tell you with all honesty...this is at the crux of why I am Catholic and not something else. I think you know I have LDS sympathies. On Saturday I offered a plausible LDS apologetic to an apparent skeptic. But if I WERE to be comfortable as an LDS, it could only be at the expense of saying that the Catholic Church is and has been not merely apostate, but brimming full with liars and tricksters at or near the top for at least the last three centuries. It seems to me like the situation with miracles is such that it doesn't allow non-Catholics to admire the Catholic Church.

 

That citation about miracles as evidence for the Catholic faith from Vatican I comes in 1870. The Council Fathers in 1870 were doubtless aware of how favorably Lourdes was being received. The decades to come would have the stigmata in several different persons, the most notable being Padre Pio. This priest would have had to fake this condition for a period of around fifty years. Either something was happening from God, or it was probably faked. I guess you could say it was from the dark side, but that would confirm my alternative of Catholics (at the top) as villains too. Of course I am not wanting you to say that you think sincere Catholics who are "out of the loop" are guilty of conspiracy, and I know you won't. But can you see my reasoning when it comes to the leadership of the Catholic Church in light of miracle claims, even restricted to the period since the establishment of the CoJCoLDS?

 

Regards,

 

Rory

Edited December 23, 2013 by 3DOP

[Storm Rider]

Merry Christmas Rory,

 

I have been to Lourdes and I admire St. Bernadette. I also admire the way the CC has a rather rigorous process by the Sacra Rituum Congregatio to verify these events before proclaiming them real. The process did not start out, but did not occur until the time of Sixtus V and then was adjusted by Paul VI and then again by John Paul II. 

 

I would not say that I think these events or the lives of many of the saints are examples of lying, or deceitful. Some of the histories I have read about have left me mystified; others have left be inspired; yet others I believe are very real. I also think that there are real miracles in other Christian churches and in other faiths. 

 

The miracles related to Mary are beyond me. I don't understand their purpose and her veneration always seems, to my pointed headed little brain, to separate humanity from the Savior and/or the Father. Regardless, there is so much that we can learn from each other, but this is an area that creates problems because LDS have no basis to relate to Mary's veneration.

Those miracles of the stigmata are also of value. I think many are real and some are not so real. The events of the stigmata in Padre Pio's early life seem more significant than later in his life. I also like those of St. Francis, St. Gemma Galgani, and St. John of God.

 

I enjoy reading about miracles and miraculous events regardless of religion. It is true that I prefer reading about Christian stories, but I hope to learn all truth regardless of where it is found. I do think that the people of God will continue to produce miracles among them; the Spirit remains strong and is active. 

 

I do think it is important that the workings of the Spirit are active in the Body of Christ, but I don't use them as a significant gauge of truth. 

[mfbukowski]

Thanks Storm Rider.

 

But what do you think of my further reflections regarding the implications of the fact that the Catholic Church scrutinizes these investigations very closely? For your information, when Bernadette of Lourdes said the beautiful lady identfiied herself as the Immaculate Conception, it was in the same decade that Pius IX defined the dogma. Bernadette just didn't make it up. She was either coached or the Lady really told her what to say. That is why my opinion is that the Catholic Church can only come out of these miracle claims as the true Church or an institution of schemers and cads. 

 

Storm Rider, I tell you with all honesty...this is at the crux of why I am Catholic and not something else. I think you know I have LDS sympathies. On Saturday I offered a plausible LDS apologetic to an apparent skeptic. But if I WERE to be comfortable as an LDS, it could only be at the expense of saying that the Catholic Church is and has been not merely apostate, but brimming full with liars and tricksters at or near the top for at least the last three centuries. It seems to me like the situation with miracles is such that it doesn't allow non-Catholics to admire the Catholic Church.

 

That citation about miracles as evidence for the Catholic faith from Vatican I comes in 1870. The Council Fathers in 1870 were doubtless aware of how favorably Lourdes was being received. The decades to come would have the stigmata in several different persons, the most notable being Padre Pio. This priest would have had to fake this condition for a period of around fifty years. Either something was happening from God, or it was probably faked. I guess you could say it was from the dark side, but that would confirm my alternative of Catholics (at the top) as villains too. Of course I am not wanting you to say that you think sincere Catholics who are "out of the loop" are guilty of conspiracy, and I know you won't. But can you see my reasoning when it comes to the leadership of the Catholic Church in light of miracle claims, even restricted to the period since the establishment of the CoJCoLDS?

 

Regards,

 

Rory

Howdy

 

I would be curious to find out what you think God's purposes are in causing/allowing these visions to happen.

 

I suppose the question ultimately goes to whether or not these provide "evidence" for the church beyond what is usually felt and defined as the Holy Spirit by Catholics.

 

I am reminded of Matthew 16: 4

A wicked and adulterous generation seeketh after a sign; and there shall no sign be given unto it, but the sign of the prophet Jonas.

[mfbukowski]

Another question I suppose that has bothered me is why we need anyone to "intercede" for us with God, when I think we can go directly to Him.

[3DOP]

Howdy

 

I would be curious to find out what you think God's purposes are in causing/allowing these visions to happen.

 

I suppose the question ultimately goes to whether or not these provide "evidence" for the church beyond what is usually felt and defined as the Holy Spirit by Catholics.

 

I am reminded of Matthew 16: 4

Hi bukowski. 

 

Well thanks for caring enough to tell us of what we remind you. I guess. Heh.

 

Firstly, Catholics believing in miracles shouldn't remind of you of the wicked and adulterous generation because no one has been asking for signs.from God. I have never in all my years as a Catholic seen or heard a devotional prayer, liturgical prayer, or impromptu prayer asking for a sign. Secondly, it should not remind you of the wicked and adulterous generation because according to the rest of the verse that you didn't quote, no sign is given to the wicked and adulterous generation, except the sign of Jonas the prophet, and we already have that!

 

I think post #4 gives a pretty good indication of how I view the significance of these events. As for your other post about prayers to the saints and our Blessed Mother, that would seem to ask for another thread, don't you think?

 

Merry Christmas to you and yours Mark. God bless.

 

Rory

Edited December 25, 2013 by 3DOP

[Duncan]

I think there is no way to verify as to whether or not visions actually happen and have actually happened to anyone else, if they believe it then great! One of my favourite vision stories or dream stories happened to St. Martin of Tours at the gate to Amiens in Belgium. No one but God and St. Martin knows for sure what actually happened. I think God through the apostasy years has been keeping the light of Christianity alive. If you are say Julian of Norwich who claimed to have had visions in the 14th century, there is no way we can say for sure but she's dead now and so when she hears the true gospel I don't think it would be a stretch for her to accept Joseph Smith's visions-if you had something happen to you it's easier to believe the same thing happened to someone else and you tend to believe what they say

[mfbukowski]

Hi bukowski. 

 

Well thanks for caring enough to tell us of what we remind you. I guess. Heh.

 

Firstly, Catholics believing in miracles shouldn't remind of you of the wicked and adulterous generation because no one has been asking for signs.from God. I have never in all my years as a Catholic seen or heard a devotional prayer, liturgical prayer, or impromptu prayer asking for a sign. Secondly, it should not remind you of the wicked and adulterous generation because according to the rest of the verse that you didn't quote, no sign is given to the wicked and adulterous generation, except the sign of Jonas the prophet, and we already have that!

 

I think post #4 gives a pretty good indication of how I view the significance of these events. As for your other post about prayers to the saints and our Blessed Mother, that would seem to ask for another thread, don't you think?

 

Merry Christmas to you and yours Mark. God bless.

 

Rory

It seems I was offensive in some way, and for that I am truly sorry.

 

It was not intended as an attack, but as a reflection on my own feelings about Catholicism as a former Catholic.

 

I have seen and participated in miraculous events since I have had the Melchizadek priesthood and know that they happen today, but in keeping with the Mormon tradition, we do not speak of such things.

 

I apologize that the Catholic way of seeing miracles is so different from what my way has become and that because of that I might have offended you.

 

To me, those were genuine questions that I have concerning the Catholic way of seeing it all.  I just don't get it anymore I guess.

 

And that also goes for Christknight- if I offended anyone, I am sorry- that was not my intention.

[mfbukowski]

The fact that there are no "public" miracles does not mean there are no miracles.

 

It is not our way to publicize these events.

[JLHPROF]

The fact that there are no "public" miracles does not mean there are no miracles.

 

It is not our way to publicize these events.

 

I agree completely.  However, I also think we have downgraded the level of our "miracles".  I really doubt the truly big, pentacostal miracles like we saw in Church History are happening, but I know that many smaller and more personal miracles continue.

[mfbukowski]

I agree completely.  However, I also think we have downgraded the level of our "miracles".  I really doubt the truly big, pentacostal miracles like we saw in Church History are happening, but I know that many smaller and more personal miracles continue.

Think that through a little.

 

If you "agree completely" that we seldom speak about the big miracles, then your doubting that we have them has no basis.

 

We could be having them on a daily basis, but if no one talks about them, no one, including you, would know.

[halconero]

I can speak for the apostles, but I can share my experience my testimony that miracles are alive and well in the Church.

I have been on the receiving end, and I have been an instrument in their performance.

[3DOP]

It seems I was offensive in some way, and for that I am truly sorry.

 

It was not intended as an attack, but as a reflection on my own feelings about Catholicism as a former Catholic.

 

I have seen and participated in miraculous events since I have had the Melchizadek priesthood and know that they happen today, but in keeping with the Mormon tradition, we do not speak of such things.

 

I apologize that the Catholic way of seeing miracles is so different from what my way has become and that because of that I might have offended you.

 

To me, those were genuine questions that I have concerning the Catholic way of seeing it all.  I just don't get it anymore I guess.

 

And that also goes for Christknight- if I offended anyone, I am sorry- that was not my intention.

 

On the contrary Mark. No offense meant, nor any taken. Sorry if the post came off brusque. I can see how I might have seemed perturbed. (As if we have no history, heh...er  . I despise emoticons. I prefer words. But perhaps a smiley might have done the trick instead of "heh". Merry Christmas and the rest was all from the bottom of my great big heart. You can misunderstand Mt. 16:4 without making me mad!

 

3DOP

Edited December 26, 2013 by 3DOP

[mfbukowski]

[3DOP]

The Book of Mormon, and the D&C are replete with miracles.

 

We today are more guarded in presenting our miracles to the world. Miracles don't convert any one. IE; Did the Priests of Pharaoh turning rods into snakes convert anyone?  For a NT example did the Resurrection of Jesus convert anyone, if so why isn't everyone a Christian?

 

Hi sometimesaint.

 

The problem some might see with your claim here, is that of making it universal. You claim as fact that "Miracles don't convert anyone." That seems like a sweeping statement to me. To illustrate your point you use an Old Testament example where priests (also called magicians) of an idolatrous religion are able to work something resembling a miracle to prove the power of their religion. The only two persons present that could have converted from this miracle you cite, would have been Moses and Aaron. It might illustrate that no one with the true faith will convert to a false religion on the basis of apparent signs and wonders, but it does not seem like that would speak to the question of whether people of good will towards the true God, can be influenced to convert or to remain converted on the basis of miracles.

 

Of course, we know that Pharao's heart remained hardened when Moses worked all of his miracles. But God predicted this result in advance according to Exodus 7 when all the action begins. It is not my belief that miracles convert everyone. That seems so obvious and yet you continue to argue that "Miracles don't convert anyone," by pointing to the Resurrection of Christ in the New Testament. Your reasoning reads as follows: "...did the Resurrection of Jesus convert anyone, if so why isn't everyone a Christian?" (bold emphasis mine)

 

If everyone isn't converted no one is converted? I would like to clarify for you and others that speaking for myself, I believe that some may be converted by miracles, but not that all are converted by any given miracle. Furthermore, I would suggest that the importance of miracles in the lives of the faithful cannot be limited merely to conversions. Miracles can play an important role in helping souls who have been long time believers to persevere in the faith.

 

"And Elias coming to all the people, said: How long do you halt between two sides? if the Lord be God, follow him: but if Baal, then follow him. And the people did not answer him a word. And Elias said again to the people: I only remain a prophet of the Lord: but the prophets of Baal are four hundred and fifty men. Let two bullocks be given us, and let them choose one bullock for themselves, and cut it in pieces and lay it upon wood, but put no fire under: and I will dress the other bullock, and lay it on wood, and put no fire under it. Call ye on the names of your gods, and I will call on the name of my Lord: and the God that shall answer by fire, let him be God. And all the people answering said: A very good proposal."  (3 Kings 18:21-24)

 

"Hear me, O Lord, hear me: that this people may learn, that thou art the Lord God, and that thou hast turned their heart again. Then the fire of the Lord fell, and consumed the holocaust, and the wood, and the stones, and the dust, and licked up the water that was in the trench. And when all the people saw this, they fell on their faces, and they said: The Lord he is God, the Lord he is God."  (3 Kings 18:37-39)

 

I find this an interesting corollary to the way miracles worked with Pharao. In Exodus we read that the Lord hardened Pharao's heart and that he would not believe. In this instance, the miracle is used and is effective to those "halting between two opinions", because "thou hast turned their heart again." It depends upon the grace of God and the heart/will of the observer as to whether a miracle will be received as an event that will move souls towards the true God or true religion. in any case, this illustrative example must be set beside that of Pharao's magicians, not to show that everyone is converted by miracles, but that some are and some are not.

 

*The passages from what I call 3 Kings is from the book that is called by most Protestants and Mormons, I Kings. Older Catholic Bibles always refer to what LDS Bibles identify as I and II Samuel, as I and II Kings.

 

Thanks for your consideration.

 

3DOP

Edited December 28, 2013 by 3DOP

[Bill “Papa” Lee]

I had a question about something mentioned on page 64 of "Mine Errand from the Lord" 

by Boyd K. Packer.

 

"The Lord told his Twelve Apostles that it was not only their privilege but their responsibility

to perform miracles. These miracles were signs. We don't seek after signs, but they are

attendant to the authority, and they are attendant in our day".

 

I see this from Matthew 10:1,8 and Mark 3:14-15.  The great signs and wonders are also

recorded for us in the Book of Acts.

 

While I can find no such commission given by Jesus in the Book of Mormon, I do see a

record in 4 Nephi 1:5 of the Nephite disciples having these sign gifts.  Is there any mention

of such a commission or some powerful miracles attributed to the twelve Mormon apostles

in the Doctrine and Covenants? If no, why would the Holy Spirit inspire the biblical writers

to mention this of their New Testament apostles?

 

Thanks,

Jim

Unless recorded in scripture, how would we know? Unless they wanted to be guilty of the sin of boasting.

[WmLaw]

D&C 84:63-73 is the closest thing, directed to both the apostles and the believers:

 

 

And as far as modern day apostles performing miracles, there are plenty of examples in Church History, my favorite being Joseph Smith's day of power in Nauvoo.

Are there accounts of modern day miracles performed by apostles, of the specific type referenced in D&C 84:69 " In my name they shall ^aopen the eyes of the blind, and unstop the ears of the deaf;  " ?

[boblloyd91]

Matthew Cowley comes to mind. There are some pretty cool experiences he had in the south pacific.