Are They Really "prophets, Seers & Revelators?"

[MiserereNobis]

Yes, now you understand me, pretty much, although I would compare their "parallel of each other in the way that each functions in their respective churches" to the presiding bishop of our church acting as if he is the pope of your church. Or a bishop acting like he is an apostle.

 

Where do stake presidents fit into all of this?  Who were the stake presidents in the early Church, from the LDS point-of-view?

[SeekerB]

"I think this is a very interesting and important topic.

Some will argue that the 1978 statement regarding priesthood ordination is an example of modern day revelation to the church. However, I would dispute that idea on the basis that there was no written revelation or document described as a revelation, the practice of ordaining black men to the priesthood had already occured in the church (in Joseph's day), and that the restriction was brought about without any recorded revelation on the subject or the exercise of common consent. The brethren were inspired to right a wrong when they earnestly sought a resolution to the problem, after having studied it out in their own minds first. This could better be described as inspiration rather than revelation. President Hinckley famously referred to this kind of revelation as an " inspired hunch".

 

I believe they are  prophets, seers and revelators, the just don't wear animal skins and stand on walls yelling "Repent or be destroyed", although their messages equate to the same thing.

 

And, based on statements made to me by one of  Bruce R McConkie's sons (I spent lots of time in his house), there was much more than an "inspired hunch" involved in the 1978 revelation on the priesthood.

Edited April 18, 2014 by SeekerB

[Bill “Papa” Lee]

Question: When you sustain the Brethren as prophets, seers and revelators, what does that mean to you?

Until recently, I never gave this question much thought because of all of the doubts I've had about the Church, I have always been 100% sure that I was not its leader. And since I had no ties to the Rigdons, Strangs or Jeffs, I was very comfortable with sustaining the Brethren as being the "duly appointed" leaders of this Church.

However, I think that most of you see their positions as prophets, seers and revelators as more than just being our version of, say, Executive Vice Presidents. But rather you view the Brethren as modern-day embodiments of Samuel, Daniel, John the Beloved, etc.

I'm having trouble with making this connection because their roles seem so different than from the prophets of old; or even from the "prophets of new" like Joseph Smith. JS brought forth a new book of scripture and a restoration of the Gospel. He made prophesies about future events. He exclaimed previous unknown truths (e.g., God is corporeal, the Godhead is three separate personages, Adam-Ondi-Ahman, etc.).

I don't see our current prophets, seers and revelators doing these types of things and up until now, it really hasn't bothered me. I just assumed that we were in a different phase of the Church and that now, HF had chosen wise men who are able administrators to lead the Church. And this made sense to me. It requires much different skills to run a church of, say, 1,500 people than it does to turn a church of 15 million people.

The problem with my view of our current prophets, seers and revelators is that it does not provide me with the same sense of confidence that it seems to provide for many of you. Now, don't get me wrong. I tend to agree with the Brethren's counsel. In fact, I will even give them the benefit of the doubt in cases in which I don't have strong feelings about the matter. For instance, I obey the Word of Wisdom despite lacking any deep conviction that HF has decreed Red Bull to be better for my immortal soul than coffee. I comply because wise men encourage it and I have no reason to believe that I will be worse off without these things. But I might be just as willing to take that attitude with advice given by my earthly father and he is an outright heathen (and proudly so).

So what is it that you see in the Brethren that makes their words end in your head with, "Thus sayeth the Lord"? As opposed to, in my head, where it might end "Thus sayeth the EVP of Northern Europe"?

And, by the way, I'm not being snarky. I SINCERELY want to know what I'm missing here. Obviously, there is something that many of you have seen or heard throughout the years that makes their position as prophets, seers and revelators more than just titles to you. Or perhaps, you've found some other way to define those terms that still allows you to have confidence that they are more than just wise men with the best of intentions. Either way, I'd LOVE to have that assurance myself so please help me to know what you know.

What it means is when God is ready to tell us something new, he will give it to us from them...I am an electrician, so,to put it in a common term to my profession, they are the "conduit" though which it will come. BTW...look into the heavens; electrician, the profession of the gods. Edited April 18, 2014 by Bill “Papa” Lee

[canard78]

Perhaps you might consider that the prophets speaking for God is by far the secondary stuff, and the exercise of the keys is by far the primary stuff. For example, are you convinced that your baptism is acceptable to God, that your partaking the Sacrament is also, and that you have received the Holy Ghost from Him? Are you convinced that you have been endowed with power by virtue of your temple ordinances, and that your family relationships are sealed on earth and in heaven?

And if not convinced, at least satisfied or happily/optimistically hopeful?

The prophets claim to keys is surely based on our confidence on whether or not they also speak for God?

Be that as it may, yes I believe in God, yes I believe that the covenants of service and obedience made at baptism to be acceptable to God. I also believe a Baptist's ordinance to be equally acceptable.

I also find the temple experience to be a holy and spiritual one. I also believe God is accepting of the worship in Sikh or Buddhist temples.

So while I find meaning amd truth in our faith tradition I do not accept or believe the teachings from our prophets that our faith practices are superior or more acceptable to God.

[canard78]

"I think this is a very interesting and important topic.Some will argue that the 1978 statement regarding priesthood ordination is an example of modern day revelation to the church. However, I would dispute that idea on the basis that there was no written revelation or document described as a revelation, the practice of ordaining black men to the priesthood had already occured in the church (in Joseph's day), and that the restriction was brought about without any recorded revelation on the subject or the exercise of common consent. The brethren were inspired to right a wrong when they earnestly sought a resolution to the problem, after having studied it out in their own minds first. This could better be described as inspiration rather than revelation. President Hinckley famously referred to this kind of revelation as an " inspired hunch".

I believe they are prophets, seers and revelators, the just don't wear animal skins and stand on walls yelling "Repent or be destroyed", although their messages equate to the same thing.

And, based on statements made to me by one of Bruce R McConkie's sons (I spent lots of time in his house), there was much more than an "inspired hunch" involved in the 1978 revelation on the priesthood.

I can't see whom you have quoted at the top but I'm inclined to agree with them in part but also with you, in part. I agree with you that it was more than an inspired hunch. I'll take your unsourced BRM reference and raise you one son of the president who lead the change (a source quoted on LDS.org):

https://byustudies.byu.edu/showtitle.aspx?title=7885

This is one of the best treatments on the topic with multiple sources and accounts of the process.

While I believe a meaningful and impactful spiritual witness was received the whole model follows a recognisable process. It's a process we're invited to follow:

- Studied it out

- Reached a unanimous conclusion

- Prayed about

- Received a spirtual witness that it was right

There was no recorded audible voice from heaven, no finger on stones or tablets, no visitation of a visible personage, no burning bush (or house plant!). This isn't a complaint. I'm reassured that the leaders receive revelation using a very similar model to how we are taught to.

The only challenge with that type of revelation is that the answers are framed and sometimes even limited by the questions we are willing to ask. Maybe that's always the case. Many of our significant scriptural revelations happen in response to a person asking a question or showing they are willing to receive the answer.

Perhaps the ongoing restoration that President Uchtdorf referred to in his latest talk in General P'hood mtg is slowed only by our willingness to accept the answer (leaders and members).

[canard78]

And, based on statements made to me by one of Bruce R McConkie's sons (I spent lots of time in his house), there was much more than an "inspired hunch" involved in the 1978 revelation on the priesthood.

In the absence of any quotes from your "account of an account of an account" I can offer a source from Elder McConkie directly. Again, certainly more than an "inspired hunch" but still a spiritual witness to the heart and mind rather than a vision or voice to the eyes and ears:

August 18, 1978

CES Religious Educators Symposium address “All Are Alike

unto God”

Bruce R. McConkie

Well, in that setting, on the first day of June in this year, 1978, the First Presidency and the Twelve, after full discussion of the proposition and all the premises and principles that are involved, importuned the Lord for a revelation. President Kimball was mouth, and he prayed with great faith and great fervor; this was one of those occasions when an inspired prayer was offered. You know the Doctrine and Covenants statement, that if we pray by the power of the Spirit we will receive answers to our prayers and it will be given us what we shall ask (see D&C 50:30). It was given President Kimball what he should ask. He prayed by the power of the Spirit, and there was perfect unity, total and complete harmony, between the Presidency and the Twelve on the issue involved.

And when President Kimball finished his prayer, the Lord gave a revelation by the power of the Holy Ghost. Revelation primarily comes by the power of the Holy Ghost. Always that member of the Godhead is involved. But most revelations, from the beginning to now, have come in that way. There have been revelations given in various ways on other occasions. The Father and the Son appeared in the Sacred Grove. Moroni, an angel from heaven, came relative to instructing the Prophet in the affairs that were destined to occur in this dispensation. There have been visions, notably the vision of the degrees of glory. There may be an infinite number of ways that God can ordain that revelations come. But, primarily, revelation comes by the power of the Holy Ghost. The principle is set forth in the Doctrine and Covenants, section 68, that whatever the elders of the Church speak, when moved upon by the power of the Holy Ghost, shall be scripture, shall be the mind and will and voice of the Lord.

On this occasion, because of the importuning and the faith, and because the hour and the time had arrived, the Lord in his providences poured out the Holy Ghost upon the First Presidency and the Twelve in a miraculous and marvelous manner, beyond anything that any then present had ever experienced. The revelation came to the president of the Church; it also came to each individual present. There were ten members of the Council of the Twelve and three of the First Presidency there assembled. The result was that President Kimball knew, and each one of us knew, independent of any other person, by direct and personal revelation to us, that the time had now come to extend the gospel and all its blessings and all its obligations, including the priesthood and the blessings of the house of the Lord, to those of every nation, culture, and race, including the black race. There was no question whatsoever as to what happened or as to the word and message that came.

http://speeches.byu.edu/?act=viewitem&id=1570

[canard78]

Ok, I understand what you are saying now (I think...). You are not really saying that the Pope is the equivalent of the LDS presiding bishop. You are saying that during the apostasy, it would make sense (in LDS thinking) for the presiding bishop to claim supremacy since there were no longer Apostles. So then the bishop of Rome must have been the presiding bishop and took control, which then morphed into the Papacy.

I can understand this from the LDS point-of-view. My argument with you was over the way the Pope functions in the Catholic Church now. I think you'd agree, that now, today, the Catholic Pope is parallel with the LDS President in the ways that each functions in their respective churches.

I deeply admire your unbeatable patience and gracious nature in this thread. I think you have very competently illustrated that the Catholic Pope is comparable to the LDS President and not the presiding Bishop.

[mfbukowski]

We recently thought about contacting him (or his office) asking what to do about a sister whose allergies prevent her from coming into the chapel building for worship services, thinking there must be something we can do to help her to be able to meet with other saints. Her allergies aren't affected by only the building, meaning the chemicals we use to clean and disinfect it, but also by many hygiene products. We know we can take the sacraments to her home, but we want to be able to meet with us somehow. I haven't checked yet to see if this is covered in the church handbook of instructions.

I'm speechless.

[Calm]

I'm speechless.

It seems more appropriate to contact a doctor to see if there is anything that can be done. There are some allergies that can be managed with inhalant masks that aren't too bulky.

If it is a matter of what cleaning products are used, that would be for the Stake facilities guy I suspect.

And one can announce from the pulpit making requests that people use no perfume and unscented care products if they need to use them at all. A specialrequestfor guys to drop their hair products along with the women usually yields good results. Deodorants aren't going to be given up, but go for the unscented. Remind people they may need to get a Sunday only unscented soap and shampoo. We had an highly sensitive woman in a previous ward. She was able to come once the ward made an effort to limit the scents in this way. It may be necessary for her to sit in the foyer (with a no scent zone) or near an open door in good weather.

If she is really sensitive and can't handle the scents coming off of people's clothing, that can be mentioned as well. We use scent free Tide and Bounce. Positive..you know the scent isn't hiding a not completely clean wash.

PS: your bishop can give permission to ha ve a small church service with the Sacrament served and a lesson for RS/PH and scripture study. Perhaps once a month a couple of couples and friends could volunteer to meet with her. Use lds.org music site for the music if there is no piano or pianist or someone who wants to play something different,

Edited April 18, 2014 by calmoriah

[Calm]

This looks like it might work and more comfortable than the ones I've seen. I may get one for cleaning, dust mite allergy plus tons of dust in Utah equals running or clogged nose 24/7

http://www.allergybegone.com/respro-aero-allergy-face-mask.html?gclid=CJWOmpHL6b0CFRRbfgodbqUAOw

Edited April 18, 2014 by calmoriah

[Storm Rider]

The prophets claim to keys is surely based on our confidence on whether or not they also speak for God?

Be that as it may, yes I believe in God, yes I believe that the covenants of service and obedience made at baptism to be acceptable to God. I also believe a Baptist's ordinance to be equally acceptable.

I also find the temple experience to be a holy and spiritual one. I also believe God is accepting of the worship in Sikh or Buddhist temples.

So while I find meaning amd truth in our faith tradition I do not accept or believe the teachings from our prophets that our faith practices are superior or more acceptable to God.

 

I don't know if I have ever thought of the ordinances of Christ's church being  better or more acceptable to God. I believe there is one source of truth in the world and that is the Holy Spirit; all truth comes from him. As the Spirit teaches or disseminates truth throughout the world the expression of those truths is highly diversified.  The objective for each child of God is to seek after truth, all truth, and gravitate to it regardless of our beginning church or faith of birth.  

 

If we seek and live by the principles of truth we have been given all will be well.  If not, then we each bear the consequences of our own sins.  Through Christ those sins are forgiven IF we are willing to accept forgiveness and keep moving forward.  The Christian and the non-Christian remain responsible for the truths received. 

[canard78]

It comes down to whether or not the priesthood was restored by john the Baptist and the 3 apostles to joseph and oliver. If so, then the lds have the line authority and the keys. If not, then the discussion needs to focus on who has the keys. Looking at the long history of Catholicism and the abuses of power and the corruption in the past, I could understand why god would withdraw the keys until the time was right to have them restored. However, either they were restored to joseph and oliver or they weren't. Now of course, oliver gave his deathbed testimony to his wife and daughter that what he experienced with the book of Mormon was true. And this would also confirm the line of authority of the keys to the priesthood. So who is correct, the lds or the other faiths?

I know you pin a lot on those witness statements, but how does a death-be testimony of seeing a vision of plates/sword and an angel confirm that we have keys today?

Just because he made a dying statement of a supernatural experience (that may have been real or just in his mind) does that prove anything else?

[canard78]

I don't know if I have ever thought of the ordinances of Christ's church being better or more acceptable to God. I believe there is one source of truth in the world and that is the Holy Spirit; all truth comes from him. As the Spirit teaches or disseminates truth throughout the world the expression of those truths is highly diversified. The objective for each child of God is to seek after truth, all truth, and gravitate to it regardless of our beginning church or faith of birth.

If we seek and live by the principles of truth we have been given all will be well. If not, then we each bear the consequences of our own sins. Through Christ those sins are forgiven IF we are willing to accept forgiveness and keep moving forward. The Christian and the non-Christian remain responsible for the truths received.

I agree with everything you've said here.

I believe many faiths have religious ceremonies that allow them to make sacrifices, covenants or commitments based on the truth they have been taught. I believe most of them are acceptable to God. I don't see Mormonism as any more true or false or authoritative or not than other churches.

[why me]

The prophets claim to keys is surely based on our confidence on whether or not they also speak for God?

Be that as it may, yes I believe in God, yes I believe that the covenants of service and obedience made at baptism to be acceptable to God. I also believe a Baptist's ordinance to be equally acceptable.

I also find the temple experience to be a holy and spiritual one. I also believe God is accepting of the worship in Sikh or Buddhist temples.

So while I find meaning amd truth in our faith tradition I do not accept or believe the teachings from our prophets that our faith practices are superior or more acceptable to God.

i don't think that many mormons would disagree with you. I have no idea how some people think that mormons believe themselves to be superior. But we mormons do claim that they have the truth because of the book of mormon and continuing revelation. I have found that the advice given by the GAs have usually be on target. I have not seem them very wrong at all.

[why me]

. I don't see Mormonism as any more true or false or authoritative or not than other churches.

However, the mormon way seems to be the right way. When many churches have been flip flopping on many moral issues, the lds church has held steady. And when I think of the advice that lds youth get, I see it as truth restored because they are told to stay away many worldly things that would be acceptable for many churches. Likewise for conference. Who can argue with the advice given at general conference.

 

Mormons who followed the counsel of the leaders and lived within their means were saved a lot of heartache in 2007-2008 when the economic crisis hit. I remember that advice that was given before the crisis...be thrifty and economical.

Edited April 18, 2014 by why me

[why me]

 

If we seek and live by the principles of truth we have been given all will be well. 

It depends on the truth that has been given. For example, many established faiths stay away from preaching chasity or premarital sex. It seems that they don't lecture about not living together outside of marriage. And so, one truth that some may receive is that it is fine to co-habit in a relationship. I can think of many things that the lds receive that makes sense that other faiths lack. And yet, for those members they live with their own truths and with what has been left out.

[why me]

Where do stake presidents fit into all of this?  Who were the stake presidents in the early Church, from the LDS point-of-view?

The lds go to a verse in Isiah. It is located in Isiah: 54:2 the king james version.

 

King James Bible

Enlarge the place of thy tent, and let them stretch forth the curtains of thine habitations: spare not, lengthen thy cords, and strengthen thy stakes;

[ChristKnight]

I don't know if I have ever thought of the ordinances of Christ's church being  better or more acceptable to God. I believe there is one source of truth in the world and that is the Holy Spirit; all truth comes from him. As the Spirit teaches or disseminates truth throughout the world the expression of those truths is highly diversified.  The objective for each child of God is to seek after truth, all truth, and gravitate to it regardless of our beginning church or faith of birth. 

 

However does not the CoJCoLDS claim that the only valid ordinances are those performed by the restored priesthood, which is only found within the CoJCoLDS?  In this sense, there is certainly a belief that the ordinances of Christ's church are more acceptable to God, or "better", since they are the only valid ones that have any efficacy as far as what is necessary to receive eternal life.

[ChristKnight]

The lds go to a verse in Isiah. It is located in Isiah: 54:2 the king james version.

 

King James Bible

Enlarge the place of thy tent, and let them stretch forth the curtains of thine habitations: spare not, lengthen thy cords, and strengthen thy stakes;

 

This doesn't say anything about stake presidents in the early Church.

[mfbukowski]

It seems more appropriate to contact a doctor to see if there is anything that can be done. There are some allergies that can be managed with inhalant masks that aren't too bulky.

If it is a matter of what cleaning products are used, that would be for the Stake facilities guy I suspect.

And one can announce from the pulpit making requests that people use no perfume and unscented care products if they need to use them at all. A specialrequestfor guys to drop their hair products along with the women usually yields good results. Deodorants aren't going to be given up, but go for the unscented. Remind people they may need to get a Sunday only unscented soap and shampoo. We had an highly sensitive woman in a previous ward. She was able to come once the ward made an effort to limit the scents in this way. It may be necessary for her to sit in the foyer (with a no scent zone) or near an open door in good weather.

If she is really sensitive and can't handle the scents coming off of people's clothing, that can be mentioned as well. We use scent free Tide and Bounce. Positive..you know the scent isn't hiding a not completely clean wash.

PS: your bishop can give permission to ha ve a small church service with the Sacrament served and a lesson for RS/PH and scripture study. Perhaps once a month a couple of couples and friends could volunteer to meet with her. Use lds.org music site for the music if there is no piano or pianist or someone who wants to play something different,

You are such a sweetheart.  I just can't do it.

[mfbukowski]

I agree with everything you've said here.

I believe many faiths have religious ceremonies that allow them to make sacrifices, covenants or commitments based on the truth they have been taught. I believe most of them are acceptable to God. I don't see Mormonism as any more true or false or authoritative or not than other churches.

For the record I disagree.

 

This is clearly the best model anywhere for combining a rigorous theocentric humanism with Christianity, without question.

 

The symbolism of the temple could not possibly have been generated by Joseph or adaptations from Masonry.  This stuff is from somewhere above our capabilities.

[Ahab]

Where do stake presidents fit into all of this? Who were the stake presidents in the early Church, from the LDS point-of-view?

We don't know for sure if the apostles appointed any, but if they did they would probably be referred to as something akin to Elder. We do know that stake presidents aren't, and weren't, the same thing as bishops and that the apostles would have had general jurisdiction over the bishops until they appointed that office between bishops and apostles which we now refer to as a stake president, denoting a person who presides over a stake, with a stake being a geographic area including multiple wards, with a ward being a smaller division of a stake. What we refer to as an Area Authority or a General Authority, also referred to as a member of a group of 70, is needed only when there is more work than an apostle can handle alone, and we just don't know how big the Church got before it went away.

[Ahab]

I'm speechless.

Good response, considering I didn't give you much info for an Aha! moment.

Now take into consideration that we were wondering if we could make some alterations to the chapel building, or maybe set up a nice big tent outside on the grounds where she could get some fresh air maybe also adding a heater, involving providing electrical connections, or maybe even parking an RV outside and setting that up for her and others who might want to join her out there, while piping in audio and video equipment from our meetings, and then multiply that by infinity and still you would only get a glimpse of what we were contemplating, all so a sister with severe allergies could meet with other members during the regular worship services.

Edited April 18, 2014 by Ahab

[Ahab]

It seems more appropriate to contact a doctor to see if there is anything that can be done. There are some allergies that can be managed with inhalant masks that aren't too bulky.

We were brain storming during a high priest group meeting, with no woman present. If only you had been there to mention the woman should wear a mask.

If it is a matter of what cleaning products are used, that would be for the Stake facilities guy I suspect.

And one can announce from the pulpit making requests that people use no perfume and unscented care products if they need to use them at all. A specialrequestfor guys to drop their hair products along with the women usually yields good results. Deodorants aren't going to be given up, but go for the unscented. Remind people they may need to get a Sunday only unscented soap and shampoo. We had an highly sensitive woman in a previous ward. She was able to come once the ward made an effort to limit the scents in this way. It may be necessary for her to sit in the foyer (with a no scent zone) or near an open door in good weather.

If she is really sensitive and can't handle the scents coming off of people's clothing, that can be mentioned as well. We use scent free Tide and Bounce. Positive..you know the scent isn't hiding a not completely clean wash.

PS: your bishop can give permission to ha ve a small church service with the Sacrament served and a lesson for RS/PH and scripture study. Perhaps once a month a couple of couples and friends could volunteer to meet with her. Use lds.org music site for the music if there is no piano or pianist or someone who wants to play something different,

Careful now. You don't want to be called an arc steadier, do ya? Men must have brain storming sessions.

[why me]

I know you pin a lot on those witness statements, but how does a death-be testimony of seeing a vision of plates/sword and an angel confirm that we have keys today?

Just because he made a dying statement of a supernatural experience (that may have been real or just in his mind) does that prove anything else?

That would be true if it were only oliver. But we have the dying testimonies of other witnesses to. Hiram page as an example. Not to mention david whitmer instructing that his testimony be placed on this tombstone. When it is all put together, we certainly have a compelling case. The heavenly visions of the priesthood are a bonus.