A Question Too Sacred To Discuss?

[Anteojito]

Oh but he did and does, even if you think he does not live now, surely you must admit he exists in legend and history. Also the supernatural exist in realization to his existence. Even if you think he is not immortal, his words and teachings are, and in inspiration which is the evidence of his teachers, he is and will always be the most influential being to ever exist, even some use his influence to do evil in his name...he has no equal. He does of course believe in you, no matter how you feel about him. Even most who do not believe him to be Devine, they hail him as a Prophet of the most High God. But I bare and bear a sure witness...using both terms serves my purpose.

I don't know if there ever was a real Jesus but I will grant that the legend of him exists. I will admit that for the most part the messages that are attributed to him are good life lessons. I disagree that he is the most influential being to ever exist. There are a lot more Buddhists and Muslims in the world. 

[Anteojito]

watch this video, "Special Witnesses"

it's a bit dated but still good nonetheless!

 

what makes you believe God doesn't exist? has he told you that?

 

Sorry I will have to go home to see the youtube, but I will watch it.

 

[rlds_coc_lds]

I disagree that he is the most influential being to ever exist. There are a lot more Buddhists and Muslims in the world. 

 

There are valid reasons to argue about who the most influential being to have existed is. Your claim that there are more Buddhists and Muslims than Christians (let alone a lot more) is not one of them.

 

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_religious_populations#Adherent_estimates

 

Despite the above link's numbers just being estimates, Buddhism doesn't even come close.

[Storm Rider]

"I also hate that question because the answer is 'no', and I kindof wish it wasn't"

 

This is something Thomas would have said and did say during his time. It is a reason why he is known today as doubting Thomas.  It would be my personal opinion that #1, it is none of our business, #2 Jesus is alive and well today and he chooses the time and place and with whom he appears, #3  why would anyone be so strident as to deny the power and authority of God?  

[mfbukowski]

There are valid reasons to argue about who the most influential being to have existed is. Your claim that there are more Buddhists and Muslims than Christians (let alone a lot more) is not one of them.

 

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_religious_populations#Adherent_estimates

 

Despite the above link's numbers just being estimates, Buddhism doesn't even come close.

Interesting that we are larger now than Judaism but don't even get on the list. No I am not talking about RLDS but welcome anyway.

[halconero]

I don't know if there ever was a real Jesus but I will grant that the legend of him exists. I will admit that for the most part the messages that are attributed to him are good life lessons. I disagree that he is the most influential being to ever exist. There are a lot more Buddhists and Muslims in the world.

Because Jesus had no influence on Islam...

[MiserereNobis]

From an outsider perspective, this does seem like a dodge.  The LDS church claims that it has prophets, yet we don't see any prophecy or revelations like Joseph Smith had.  The church also claims that its apostles are special witnesses of Christ, but with what appears like a bit of a wink that that means that they have seen Christ, yet when directly asked, the question is deferred as too sacred.

 

I know my point-of-view as non-Mormon doesn't matter in the LDS church (just as I believe that non-Catholics should stay out of Catholic business), but I hope that my expression can help you understand the non member point-of-view.  If you have a prophet, let him prophesy.  If you have apostles that are supposed to have seen Christ, let them say so.  Otherwise it seems like you are trying to have it both ways.

Edited February 22, 2014 by MiserereNobis

[Duncan]

From an outsider perspective, this does seem like a dodge.  The LDS church claims that it has prophets, yet we don't see any prophecy or revelations like Joseph Smith had.  The church also claims that its apostles are special witnesses of Christ, but with what appears like a bit of a wink that that means that they have seen Christ, yet when directly asked, the question is deferred as too sacred.

 

I know my point-of-view as non-Mormon doesn't matter in the LDS church (just as I believe that non-Catholics should stay out of Catholic business), but I hope that my expression can help you understand the non member point-of-view.  If you have a prophet, let him prophesy.  If you have apostles that are supposed to have seen Christ, let them say so.  Otherwise it seems like you are trying to have it both ways.

 

 

just as an aside and I am just curious about this but I am wondering if any Popes have claimed to have seen Christ? I am not Catholic and I have no idea! Thank you!

[Anteojito]

There are valid reasons to argue about who the most influential being to have existed is. Your claim that there are more Buddhists and Muslims than Christians (let alone a lot more) is not one of them.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_religious_populations#Adherent_estimates

Despite the above link's numbers just being estimates, Buddhism doesn't even come close.

I stand corrected, Thank you.

Edited February 22, 2014 by Anteojito

[Kevin Christensen]

David Haight, October 1989 Conference,  For example.

 

http://www.lds.org/ensign/1989/11/the-sacrament-and-the-sacrifice?lang=eng&query=David+B.+Haight

 

Also, try reading Greg Smith's Interpreter article, both parts.

 

http://www.mormoninterpreter.com/passing-up-the-heavenly-gift-part-one-of-two/

 

After I published my NDE article in JBMS, I heard a number of impressive stories from various individuals.

 

And when you read the New Testament, notice how often people are told to hold their peace.  The Mount of Transfiguration, for instance.  "Tell no man..."

 

FWIW

 

Kevin Christensen

Bethel Park, PA

[MiserereNobis]

just as an aside and I am just curious about this but I am wondering if any Popes have claimed to have seen Christ? I am not Catholic and I have no idea! Thank you!

 

Hmm.  Of the top of my head, I can think of Pope Leo XIII hearing a conversation between Christ and the devil concerning the destruction of the Church (much like the story of Job).  The vision was so intense that he immediately composed the prayer to St. Michael and then ordered it to be said after all low Masses.

 

Besides that, however, there are MANY Saints in the Catholic Church who have had visions of Christ, and these visions are accepted as authentic and worthy of belief.  St. Teresa of Avila comes to mind, but there are many more.  The Catholic Church does not limit visions of Christ to the Pope and is open to anyone seeing Jesus or Mary (or another Saint), but the Church also rigorously investigates such claims.

[Duncan]

Hmm.  Of the top of my head, I can think of Pope Leo XIII hearing a conversation between Christ and the devil concerning the destruction of the Church (much like the story of Job).  The vision was so intense that he immediately composed the prayer to St. Michael and then ordered it to be said after all low Masses.

 

Besides that, however, there are MANY Saints in the Catholic Church who have had visions of Christ, and these visions are accepted as authentic and worthy of belief.  St. Teresa of Avila comes to mind, but there are many more.  The Catholic Church does not limit visions of Christ to the Pope and is open to anyone seeing Jesus or Mary (or another Saint), but the Church also rigorously investigates such claims.

 

 

 

very interesting! Thank you!

[Duncan]

David Haight, October 1989 Conference,  For example.

 

http://www.lds.org/ensign/1989/11/the-sacrament-and-the-sacrifice?lang=eng&query=David+B.+Haight

 

Also, try reading Greg Smith's Interpreter article, both parts.

 

http://www.mormoninterpreter.com/passing-up-the-heavenly-gift-part-one-of-two/

 

After I published my NDE article in JBMS, I heard a number of impressive stories from various individuals.

 

And when you read the New Testament, notice how often people are told to hold their peace.  The Mount of Transfiguration, for instance.  "Tell no man..."

 

FWIW

 

Kevin Christensen

Bethel Park, PA

 

 

I just read the article, it's very interesting! I know that other Apostles since Joseph Smith have seen and recorded their visionary experiences, George F. Richards twice, Hugh B. Brown and others I forget now! (I no doubt you as well know this)

Edited February 22, 2014 by Duncan

[mormonnewb]

Why would someone want to answer the question publicly? Right here on this board we have several weak minded closet apostates who anonymously mock the leadership of the Church, some who even have anonymous blogs full of such mockery. They have no regard to how their constant mockery of sacred things might affect the faith of those not yet strong, yet they hypocritically go to Church, hold callings, teach classes and hold temple recommends. Why would anyone want to subject even more sacred things to such actions.

Thank heavens for the "weak minded closet apostates!" They are the cornerstone of my testimony of this Church. Because if God's truth can't withstand the critical scrutiny of mere men, then it is not truth at all, but rather propaganda. In fact, I believe that those who are skeptical of authority follow in the tradition of the Prophet Joseph Smith. Had he not been so "weak minded," he would have just fallen in line with the first pastor he encountered as a boy. Instead, he continued to seek out truth for himself.

As for the "mocking," history teaches that all too often, those who don't tell the truth humorously, instead tell it posthumously. Erasmus survived (and helped bring about the Reformation) when his predecessors often burned at the stake because he used satire to point out some of the problems in the Catholic Church. Our very own J Golden Kimball employed a fair amount of "mockery" of church leaders as he faithfully served the Church. So, thank heavens for the mockers too!

Edited February 22, 2014 by mormonnewb

[mfbukowski]

David Haight, October 1989 Conference,  For example.

 

http://www.lds.org/ensign/1989/11/the-sacrament-and-the-sacrifice?lang=eng&query=David+B.+Haight

 

Also, try reading Greg Smith's Interpreter article, both parts.

 

http://www.mormoninterpreter.com/passing-up-the-heavenly-gift-part-one-of-two/

 

After I published my NDE article in JBMS, I heard a number of impressive stories from various individuals.

 

And when you read the New Testament, notice how often people are told to hold their peace.  The Mount of Transfiguration, for instance.  "Tell no man..."

 

FWIW

 

Kevin Christensen

Bethel Park, PA

I have not yet finished the Greg Smith piece, but I think that perhaps one reason we commonly are not told these stories is that there is always "another explanation" to cause such witness accounts to be dismissed. Such accounts will not convince the skeptics as shown even on this thread.

Were I to ever have such an experience I would keep it to myself.

Recently on this board we were discussing the same thing and I was encouraged by a skeptic to describe a religious experience in detail and foolishly did so because he was making the same objection, that Mormons would not tell about experiences which were "too sacred" and so he did not believe they actually happened.

When I did so, he scoffed and remained unconvinced, describing my experience as a case of the "vapors".

There is no point in even trying to explain such experiences to those who have not had them- they are like blind men trying to visualize the color yellow. If you haven't seen it, there is no way to describe it to convince others that it even exists.

It is as if half the world is blind and we are trying to describe a rainbow, and they are convinced we are making it all up.

[mfbukowski]

Had he not been so "weak minded," he would have just fallen in line with the first pastor he encountered as a boy. Instead, he continued to seek out truth for himself.

Which is what we have done, and you must do for yourself. Rainbows are real.

[mfbukowski]

Hmm.  Of the top of my head, I can think of Pope Leo XIII hearing a conversation between Christ and the devil concerning the destruction of the Church (much like the story of Job).  The vision was so intense that he immediately composed the prayer to St. Michael and then ordered it to be said after all low Masses.

 

Besides that, however, there are MANY Saints in the Catholic Church who have had visions of Christ, and these visions are accepted as authentic and worthy of belief.  St. Teresa of Avila comes to mind, but there are many more.  The Catholic Church does not limit visions of Christ to the Pope and is open to anyone seeing Jesus or Mary (or another Saint), but the Church also rigorously investigates such claims.

This is required reading- it is a good primer on Wittgenstein and a fascinating study of the limits of language in speaking about religious experience.http://www.amazon.com/The-Return-Mystical-Wittgenstein-Christian/dp/1441104445

[strappinglad]

To prophesy means to testify of Christ, His mission, His death and resurrection , the atonement and its power to save.

There is a lot of prophecy in the Old Testament about the future coming of Christ. There is prophecy of destruction of nations if there is no repentance. The Book of Mormon contains the same sort of prophecies. I know of no President of the Church that has not prophesied in such a manner.

Now, if you want President Monson to stand in the next conference and declare that on June 23 , 2020, Manhattan will be destroyed by a tsunami , you just might be disappointed. There are a lot of those kinds of prophets. Al Gore comes to mind.

[Storm Rider]

From an outsider perspective, this does seem like a dodge.  The LDS church claims that it has prophets, yet we don't see any prophecy or revelations like Joseph Smith had.  The church also claims that its apostles are special witnesses of Christ, but with what appears like a bit of a wink that that means that they have seen Christ, yet when directly asked, the question is deferred as too sacred.

 

I know my point-of-view as non-Mormon doesn't matter in the LDS church (just as I believe that non-Catholics should stay out of Catholic business), but I hope that my expression can help you understand the non member point-of-view.  If you have a prophet, let him prophesy.  If you have apostles that are supposed to have seen Christ, let them say so.  Otherwise it seems like you are trying to have it both ways.

 

Hello Nobis, I understand your POV and appreciate it. When we say that we believe that apostles are special witnesses of Jesus Christ there is an acknowledgement that we also believe that Jesus has and does talk with them. There are certainly stories of Christ appearing to some of the prophets/apostles, but there is also an absence of stories from the vast majority of apostles that have lived in the this latter days.  I don't think that one can infer they did not see Christ. What is an absolute fact is that they have each born strong witness of him.  

 

I often wonder how their service would change quantifiably if those that have seen him said so and those who have not also said so.  I am not sure it matters; would more people be converted to the Church?  Would more people be led to Christ?  I suspect the impact would be negligible at best.  Would people only listen to those that say they have seen him? Would it put pressure on leaders to say so when they have not? Would it motivate members to say they have? What is the real objective when we testify of Christ?  

 

I do think there is a valid argument that discussion regarding the occurrence of supernatural events is good.  I think that the LDS as a people have tended to be more circumspect about these supernatural events from healings to visions than individuals in the Catholic Church.  I really don't know if one can say that one is better than the other, but there are cultural norms in play.

 

As far as a prophet being a prophet; Revelations identifies what prophetic ability is and they each fulfill it. 

[Robert F. Smith]

 

The article mentions:

 

"Occasionally during the past year I have been asked a question. Usually it comes as 

a curious, almost an idle, question about the qualifications to stand as a witness 

for Christ. The question they ask is, “Have you seen Him?”  That is a question that 

I have never asked of another. I have not asked that question of my brethren in the 

Quorum, thinking that it would be so sacred and so personal that one would have to 

have some special inspiration, indeed, some authorization, even to ask it".

 

Considering that the apostles recorded several appearances of Christ in the New

Testament, why should you not ask this question?

 

Thanks,

Jim

 

Barely a year into his membership in the Twelve (this is a 1971 address), Elder Packer asks,

 

There are those who hear testimonies borne in the Church, by those in high station and by members in the wards and branches, all using the same words—“I know that God lives; I know that Jesus is the Christ,” and come to question, “Why cannot it be said in plainer words? Why aren’t they more explicit and more descriptive? Cannot the apostles say more?”

 

The simple answer is, "yes," they are far more explicit at times, just as the Apostles and Prophets were in ancient times.  An excellent example, from which we get a short course in inspiration and even dialogic revelation:

 

Richard G. Scott, "How to Obtain Revelation and Inspiration for Your Personal Life," 182nd LDS General Conference, April 2012, online at https://www.lds.org/general-conference/2012/04/how-to-obtain-revelation-and-inspiration-for-your-personal-life?lang=eng&query=scott,+(name%3a%22Richard+G.+Scott%22) ;  Ensign, 42/5 (May 2012), 45-47.

[thesometimesaint]

Says who? Why is it too sacred? 

 

To what end would such a revelation be? The critics wouldn't believe it anyway and those that already believe would be stuck if they didn't have such a revelation themselves..

[thesometimesaint]

Because I don't believe he exists

 

Then of what value would it be to you to hear such witness? Something about pearls and swine comes to mind.

[Robert F. Smith]

Because I don't believe he exists

At least you are honest and direct about it.

 

I can't think of anything sadder than a bunch of spiritual wastrels yukking it up over someone else's spiritual knowledge (or lack of it).  Do we really see any advantage in casting pearls before swine?

[Paddy]

I am of the opinion that the physical manifestation of Jesus to a person for the purpose of that person becoming a special witness is spiritually ineffective. The subjective nature of how a person experiences spirituality can make a physical manifestation a limiting factor to revelation. For example one person may be more spiritually susceptible to dreams, another may be more spiritually influenced by mind impressions, or rational descernment. When all these other experiences are coupled with the spirit it can have a significant and lasting witness.

For myself I doubt that Jesus appearing to me would convince me, more than I already know, of the reality and divinity of Jesus.

I wonder if that is the same for apostles, other members of the church and other Christians. An apostle is a position of responsibility to witness of their witness however that was received.

Edited February 22, 2014 by Paddy

[Robert F. Smith]

I don't know if there ever was a real Jesus but I will grant that the legend of him exists. I will admit that for the most part the messages that are attributed to him are good life lessons. I disagree that he is the most influential being to ever exist. There are a lot more Buddhists and Muslims in the world. 

Secular scholars agree that the Buddha existed in real time, and that his teachings (while edited and passed on with some changes by his followers) are pretty much as he intended.  Does Buddhism seem to you to provide good life lessons, and would you consider becoming a Buddhist -- if only to receive the practical benefits of meditation, for example?  No belief in a god is required.

 

By the way, most secular scholars who deal with such matters believe that there was a real Jesus.  They simply don't accept that he was divine.  Jews pretty much take the same position.