Moving Forward With Constant Revelation?

[thesometimesaint]

Not sure how the article bolsters your previous statement about things said in GC

 

GC is the time in which we normally learn what that revelation for the whole Church is. IE; My Grandnephew was just set apart as a Missionary after it was revealed by God to the First Presidency where he was going. That normally now-a-days(SEE D&C for examples) doesn't effect the whole Church so there is no need for its being told in GC. The calling of a new First Presidency, member to the Quorum of the 12 Apostles, etc., etc., etc. does effect the whole Church so is done in GC.

[JLHPROF]

"set apart as a Missionary after it was revealed by God to the First Presidency where he was going. "

 

 

Wow.  Now that's faith.

I might be willing to label it as prompted by the spirit, but I don't think I would presume it was revealed directly by God.

[thesometimesaint]

Wow.  Now that's faith.

I might be willing to label it as prompted by the spirit, but I don't think I would presume it was revealed directly by God.

 

I have sufficient faith for my needs at this time. That will probably change.

 

ALL mission calls go to the First Presidency. I have no reason to believe they don't prayerfully consider each and every decision. IE; When my son went to Zimbabwe we racked our minds to figure out why there. Then we remembered that as a small child he'd often pray to see the animals in Africa.

[CV75]

For the major example in my life, it would have to be a personal revelation (from the Holy Spirit)

I think our leaders do the same, and we are encouraged to do likewise. In April, President Monson said, “(From the first Session) Those who will address us have sought heaven’s help and direction as they have prepared their messages. ...May we—all of us, here and elsewhere—be filled with the Spirit of the Lord and be uplifted and inspired as we listen and learn... (From the Last Session) We have been fed spiritually as we have listened to the inspired words of the men and women who have addressed us… May the Spirit we have felt during these past two days be and abide with us as we go about those things which occupy us each day, and may we ever be found doing the work of the Lord.”

But from the LDS perspective, what was the last thing mentioned by any of the 15 Apostles which would constitute a revelation from God about any doctrine or principle for the church as a whole?

I agree with others that the messages in General Conference and the First Presidency messages in the Ensign constitute revelation from God about the doctrines and principles for the Church.

As to the practice of constant (I’ll add continuing) revelation, he said: “We face many serious challenges in the world today, but I assure you that our Heavenly Father is mindful of us. He will guide and bless us as we put our faith and trust in Him and will see us through whatever difficulties come our way. ...May our homes be filled …with the Spirit of the Lord. May we constantly nourish our testimonies of the gospel, that they will be a protection for us against the buffetings of the adversary.”

Assuming you feel it is important to have this in your own church, what was the last thing mentioned by your leaders which would constitute a revelation from God about any doctrine or principle for your church as a whole?

[JLHPROF]

 

But from the LDS perspective, what was the last thing mentioned by any of the 15 Apostles

which would constitute a revelation from God about any doctrine or principle for the church

as a whole?

 

Well, there hasn't been an actual written/recorded revelation issued to the Church since the days of Joseph F. Smith.

 

But there have many things taught that are considered a revelation in LDS perspective - everything from the lifting of the priesthood ban, the proclamation on family, the changing of missionary ages, the changes in the temple...and SO many more are considered to have come by revelation.  Even if there isn't one actually recorded that we can read.

 

I wonder how people would react if President Monson got up in General Conference and read a new "Thus Saith The Lord" type revelation.  Most members would be ecstatic, the newspapers would have a field day, the skeptics would be all over it...it could be a fascinating thing to observe.

Edited May 16, 2014 by JLHPROF

[theplains]

Assuming you feel it is important to have this in your own church, what was the last thing mentioned by your leaders which would constitute a revelation from God about any doctrine or principle for your church as a whole?

 

Here is an online transcript from Living Truth's website in pdf form that is a discussion

of the temptation of Jesus and a comparison to Adam and Eve. It was a fresh look at

an older revelation of how Eve was not in the will of God in her disobedience.  This

would fall under the principle or doctrine of the Fall, their original sin, and present day

temptations.

 

Thanks,

Jim

[CV75]

Here is an online transcript from Living Truth's website in pdf form that is a discussion

of the temptation of Jesus and a comparison to Adam and Eve. It was a fresh look at

an older revelation of how Eve was not in the will of God in her disobedience.  This

would fall under the principle or doctrine of the Fall, their original sin, and present day

temptations.

 

Thanks,

Jim

Which part of this discussion do you consider revelation?

[Stone holm]

Nice sentiments, even if they are non-specific platitudes.

But platitudes are very important, they are what most members cherish and hold dear to their hearts, a love fostered by Priesthood Correlation. The milk of platitudes fills to the brim, do not concern yourself with meat. We will become spiritual carnivores only after the Millenium begins.

[thesometimesaint]

But platitudes are very important, they are what most members cherish and hold dear to their hearts, a love fostered by Priesthood Correlation. The milk of platitudes fills to the brim, do not concern yourself with meat. We will become spiritual carnivores only after the Millenium begins.

 

The meat of the Gospel is found in what we learn in the Temple.

[Stone holm]

The meat of the Gospel is found in what we learn in the Temple.

I question that.

[thesometimesaint]

I question that.

 

I'm fine with that. However That is what the Prophets have said. As a regular member I can sit and listen to all the fine talks in our regular meetings. But once I go to the Temple I become active participants in not only my own Salvation but in the Salvation of others. Without which neither they nor I are Saved.

Edited May 19, 2014 by thesometimesaint

[Stone holm]

I'm fine with that. However That is what the Prophets have said. As a regular member I can sit and listen to all the fine talks in our regular meetings. But once I go to the Temple I become active participants in not only my own Salvation but in the Salvation of others. Without which neither they nor I are Saved.

If we are talking about meat as being the active rituals necessary for Exaltation, then yes. If we are talking about meat as a deep understanding of the purpose of life and how the cosmos works, then no not really.

[thesometimesaint]

If we are talking about meat as being the active rituals necessary for Exaltation, then yes. If we are talking about meat as a deep understanding of the purpose of life and how the cosmos works, then no not really.

 

If the Church isn't about Exaltation then we are just a social club of little value in this life and none in the next. I've never assumed the Temple is how the cosmos works, but it is good for why it does.

[Ahab]

If we are talking about meat as being the active rituals necessary for Exaltation, then yes. If we are talking about meat as a deep understanding of the purpose of life and how the cosmos works, then no not really.

If by a deep understanding you mean a very basic or fundamental understanding of the purpose of life and how the cosmos works then yes it really is.

It doesn't get more basic than that.

[Stone holm]

If the Church isn't about Exaltation then we are just a social club of little value in this life and none in the next. I've never assumed the Temple is how the cosmos works, but it is good for why it does.

I view the Temple primarily as fulfilling two, possibly three functions, 1. To provide a sacred site to receive the rituals necessary for Exaltation, 2. To provide a metaphoric dramatic teaching and learning opportunity for those who learn best in that mode, and 3. Crowd control. Also to provide service to the deceased, so I guess that is 4.

[Tiki]

wow! that kind of position could have some big implications for those wishing to change the current stance on things like female ordination and homosexuality in the church

Well, since, to quote you, you "disagree with what is said in GC constitutes revelation," then if your above desires were mentioned in GC, then you would have to disagree with it.

[Coreyb]

"i disagree that anything said at GC constitutes revelation"

 

That is my actual quote, with added emphasis. If you are gonna quote me don't misquote me. Also, those actually arent my desires for the church. If you pay closer attention you will find I was speaking of "those wishing to change the current stance".

[theplains]

Which part of this discussion do you consider revelation?

 

I had never seen it revealed how the temptation of Eve compared with

that of Jesus. Mr. Price explained it pretty well with the scriptural

references.

 

Thanks,

Jim

[CV75]

I had never seen it revealed how the temptation of Eve compared with

that of Jesus. Mr. Price explained it pretty well with the scriptural

references.

 

Thanks,

Jim

On this basis, that kind of exegesis doesn't differ from what can be observed about Elder Oak's recent talk about Priesthood or Elder Bednar's references to the enabling and strengthening power of the Atonement. And we see the sort of "inventive" thing Mr. Price came up with on this board all the time (at least people say that's what I've done on occasion--guilty as charged--LOL)! So I'm not sure why you would suggest that the LDS Church is not likewise moving forward with constant revelation, or is somehow doing less than Mr. Price.

Edited May 20, 2014 by CV75

[CV75]

the temptation of Eve compared with that of Jesus

Regarding that comparison, there is none, really: Mosiah 3:7...

[theplains]

Regarding that comparison, there is none, really: Mosiah 3:7...

 

Actually, a comparison can easily be made.

 

In Christ's temptation, did his actions reveal that he followed Satan's will or God's will?  

And in the case of Adam and Eve's temptation, did their actions reveal that they followed

Satan's will or God's will?

 

Thanks,

Jim

[thesometimesaint]

Actually, a comparison can easily be made.

 

In Christ's temptation, did his actions reveal that he followed Satan's will or God's will?  

And in the case of Adam and Eve's temptation, did their actions reveal that they followed

Satan's will or God's will?

 

Thanks,

Jim

The temptations were nearly the same. Eve was tempted and succumb. Adam chose to stay with Eve.  The response to those temptations is what was different.

[CV75]

Actually, a comparison can easily be made.

 

In Christ's temptation, did his actions reveal that he followed Satan's will or God's will?  

And in the case of Adam and Eve's temptation, did their actions reveal that they followed

Satan's will or God's will?

 

Thanks,

Jim

Jesus acted according to the Father’s will in all things. Jesus was also tempted in all things; Adam and Eve were not tempted in all things, at least on the point of the Fall.

 

Beyond that, it could be said that Adam and Eve were tempted in “all things” in which the Lord would allow them to be tempted, and being less than God of course they failed, as we do. Both the limits of temptation, and their escape where they succeeded (1 Corinthian 10:13), were possible only through “through the redemption of Christ, whom [Almighty God] has prepared from the foundation of the world” (Mosiah 18:13, Ether 3:14).

 

According to the Biblical text, it was not God’s will that they partake of the forbidden fruit. LDS can add that it was not God’s will that they partake of the forbidden fruit, at least at that particular time, and that temptation would eventually be permitted. But overarching His will in all this is His will that all His children be saved and enjoy that which they are willing to receive, through the merits of the Atonement. His will is that we all be perfect in light of the reality that is agency, so He exerted His will as far as it could go and prepared the Atonement.

 

His will that we exercise agency does not mean that He wills us to sin, but that He wills us to be perfect, and that according to His will He provided the means for us to choose perfection, which includes resisting temptation, repentance when we sin and becoming further strengthened when we don’t sin.

Edited May 22, 2014 by CV75

[theplains]

According to the Biblical text, it was not God’s will that they partake of the forbidden fruit. LDS can add that it was not God’s will that they partake of the forbidden fruit, at least at that particular time, and that temptation would eventually be permitted..

 

God permits all temptations to occur at any time in order for us to exercise our

free will.  I don't believe He restricted them from eating at one time, but then later

it was His will for them to do so.  I don't believe God wants us to succumb to any

of Satan's temptations at any time.

 

But do you believe his command not to eat had a time-expiration?

 

Thanks,

Jim

[CV75]

God permits all temptations to occur at any time in order for us to exercise our

free will.  I don't believe He restricted them from eating at one time, but then later

it was His will for them to do so.  I don't believe God wants us to succumb to any

of Satan's temptations at any time.

 

But do you believe his command not to eat had a time-expiration?

 

Thanks,

Jim

I said, "LDS can add..."

 

What does your question have to do with your suggestion that current LDS revelation might less "major" than Mr. Price's?

 

The I'll be happy to entertain your question once you explain -- in the context of the six days of Creation, the one day of Rest, the temporal conditions (or otherwise, and you might want to describe them) within the Garden of Eden, the immortal nature of Adam and Eve (or otherwise and you might want to describe that also) in relation to their choices -- what you mean by "time" and what do you believe happened to the command not to partake of the forbidden fruit after the Fall, and to the forbidden fruit.