Are Modern Day Prophets Redundant?

[Bikeemikey]

We Mormons are in an interesting place as our primary religious text (the BOM) originates outside of the priesthood structure and provides no record of anyone receiving the priesthood, at least until Christ comes.

We have records of priests and teachers etc but no record of authority.

[Kenngo1969]

Spot on. In Primary today, they focused on following the prophet as the only way, nothing about a personal relationship, or nothing about the Holy Spirit.

That'll come next week!

 

P.S.: Or next year; they do have yearly themes in Primary.

Edited May 19, 2014 by Kenngo1969

[CV75]

Did Christ say elsewhere in the NT or BoM that He would also send us living prophets?

I think this is to be udnerstood by the New Testament and Book of Mormon prophecies about the Restoration. In addition to the implication that latter-day prophets teach and receive revelation worthy of attending to, I recommend a word search of the word “teach” in the Book of Mormon and New Testament, and you will see the role as it pertains to prophets and apostles after the Ascension of Christ, which would still hold true for the Restoration. A couple of my personal favorites:

Matthew 28:18-19

3 Nephi 23:14 (also 3 Nephi 26:17 and 3 Nephi 19:16).

In addition, 3 Nephi 27 is an example of the tewlve receiving revelation and instruction from Jesus after He commissioned them to lead the Church. Peter received a revelation about allowing the Gospel to be extended to the Gentiles (Acts 10). John was also given the job to prophesy (Revelation 10:11).

So taking the Biblical and Book of Mormon teachings about the Apostasy, Restoration and latter-days, they come together to show that living prophets and apostles would be part of the Restored Church and that exercising the keys involve receiving revelation and teaching, just as Peter did.

Edited May 19, 2014 by CV75

[teddyaware]

We Mormons are in an interesting place as our primary religious text (the BOM) originates outside of the priesthood structure and provides no record of anyone receiving the priesthood, at least until Christ comes.

We have records of priests and teachers etc but no record of authority.

In light of the above, please explain the following:

42 And it came to pass that Alma was appointed to be the first chief judge, he being also the high priest, his father having conferred the office upon him, and having given him the charge concerning all the affairs of the church. (Alma 29)

 

and,

6 Behold, thou art Nephi, and I am God. Behold, I declare it unto thee in the presence of mine angels, that ye shall have power over this people, and shall smite the earth with famine, and with pestilence, and destruction, according to the wickedness of this people.

7 Behold, I give unto you power, that whatsoever ye shall seal on earth shall be sealed in heaven; and whatsoever ye shall loose on earth shall be loosed in heaven; and thus shall ye have power among this people. (Helaman 10)

and,

I, Alma, having been consecrated by my father, Alma, to be a high priest over the church of God, he having power and authority from God to do these things, behold, I say unto you that he began to establish a church in the land which was in the borders of Nephi; yea, the land which was called the land of Mormon; yea, and he did baptize his brethren in the waters of Mormon. (Alma 5)

Edited May 19, 2014 by teddyaware

[Palerider]

I would take a close look at Matt. 21: 35-37

 

35.And the husbandmen took his servants and beat one and killed another and stoned another.

 

36.Again he sent other servants more than the first: and they did unto them likewise.

 

37. But last of all he sent unto them his son, saying, They will reverence my son.

 

Also see Matt. 13: 24-30 and see if you can find the "restoration" being spelled out in that parable. It isn't there.

 

The scriptures do indeed speak of a restoration, just not in the manner that the LDS church wants to portray it. 

 

See also 1 Corinthians 4:9

 

"9. For I think that God hath set forth us the Apostles last, as it were appointed unto death: for we are made a spectacle unto the world, and unto angels, and unto men."

Edited May 19, 2014 by Palerider

[Mola Ram Suda Ram]

Its important to note that the scriptures are not for private interpretation. One needs to ask, who gets to interpret the scriptures? Only the prophet is able to give official interpretation. I think that is import so that we don't waver to and fro.

[teddyaware]

I would take a close look at Matt. 21: 35-37

 

35.And the husbandmen took his servants and beat one and killed another and stoned another.

 

36.Again he sent other servants more than the first: and they did unto them likewise.

 

37. But last of all he sent unto them his son, saying, They will reverence my son.

 

Also see Matt. 13: 24-30 and see if you can find the "restoration" being spelled out in that parable. It isn't there.

 

The scriptures do indeed speak of a restoration, just not in the manner that the LDS church wants to portray it. 

 

See also 1 Corinthians 4:9

 

"9. For I think that God hath set forth us the Apostles last, as it were appointed unto death: for we are made a spectacle unto the world, and unto angels, and unto men."

 

If your interpretation of  Matthew 21:35-37 were the correct one (if I understand you correctly), there would have been no need for Christ to set up a Church organization under the prophetic leadership of Apostles and Prophets in the first place. In other words, there would have not only not been a need for a restoration but there would have been no need for a hierarchical Church organization established to lead and guide the Church after His ascension into heaven. Yet Christ did establish a Church organization with living Apostles and Prophets standing at the head (or the foundation) of that organization...

11 And he gave some, apostles; and some, prophets; and some, evangelists; and some, pastors and teachers;

12 For the perfecting of the saints, for the work of the ministry, for the edifying of the body of Christ:

13 Till we all come in the unity of the faith, and of the knowledge of the Son of God, unto a perfect man, unto the measure of the stature of the fulness of Christ:

14 That we henceforth be no more children, tossed to and fro, and carried about with every wind of doctrine, by the sleight of men, and cunning craftiness, whereby they lie in wait to deceive; (Eph 4)

As to your second point: We have the Apostle Paul saying that living Apostles were placed first in the Church and also, along with the living Christ Himself, at the foundation of the Church. So what did Paul mean when He said that Christ set forth the Apostles last in the Church? Was he contradicting himself? No. What Paul was saying was that in a manner similar to Christ Himself -- who was hated, persecuted and brutalized by men -- the Apostles proved to be the most despised and mistreated of all the members of the Church of Christ. But why? Because they were the leaders of the Church and therefore the prime targets for destruction by the enemies of the Church; and this in fulfillment of the Lord's prophetic warning to His Apostles which He declared just prior to His atoning sacrifice...

18 If the world hate you, ye know that it hated me before it hated you.

19 If ye were of the world, the world would love his own: but because ye are not of the world, but I have chosen you out of the world, therefore the world hateth you.

20 Remember the word that I said unto you, The servant is not greater than his lord. If they have persecuted me, they will also persecute you; if they have kept my saying, they will keep yours also.

21 But all these things will they do unto you for my name’s sake, because they know not him that sent me. (John 15)

 

Simply put, the Apostles suffered the worst of the mistreatment heaped upon the Church by the ungodly; and this is precisely why the Lord said "the last shall be the first."

Edited May 19, 2014 by teddyaware

[Palerider]

And that is YOUR incorrect interpretation. Just because it is ONE interpretation doesn't make it correct. In the end, you have to rely on the teachings of LDS "scripture" to support your interpretation, which is circular in logic.

 

There are times when the Lord establishes something with the intent that it continue but, because of man's choices it doesn't. You need to re-read the parable of the tares. Your own doctrine teaches this regarding the Apostacy. So went the original church.

 

But that doesn't mean that your interpretation of HOW Israel will be restored is correct. The Lord also said that the descendants of David would always sit on the throne of Israel but they don't now, do they. Why is that? Because the kingdom hasn't been restored yet, has it.

 

When it is restored in the future, a descendant of David shall indeed sit on the throne.

[teddyaware]

And that is YOUR incorrect interpretation. Just because it is ONE interpretation doesn't make it correct. In the end, you have to rely on the teachings of LDS "scripture" to support your interpretation, which is circular in logic.

 

There are times when the Lord establishes something with the intent that it continue but, because of man's choices it doesn't. You need to re-read the parable of the tares. Your own doctrine teaches this regarding the Apostacy. So went the original church.

 

But that doesn't mean that your interpretation of HOW Israel will be restored is correct. The Lord also said that the descendants of David would always sit on the throne of Israel but they don't now, do they. Why is that? Because the kingdom hasn't been restored yet, has it.

 

When it is restored in the future, a descendant of David shall indeed sit on the throne.

In the end there is no private interpretation of the scriptures, only revelation. So with our competing revelations -- if you do indeed believe you have received revelation from heaven on the points in question -- we will just have to agree to disagree.

At any rate, it's good to know you believe some sort of restoration is needed and that the status quo for God's kingdom on earth is not permanent, but that it will eventually pass through a period of enlargement and change.

Edited May 19, 2014 by teddyaware

[Glenn101]

 

"This may seem really far fetched"

Why do you think it would seem far fetched? God doesn't give conflicting revelations. Unless you've never received a testimony of the divinely appointed mission of the Prophet Joseph Smith Jr. or the revelations about the the continuation of the restoration through an unbroken line of prophets until the second coming of The Lord, then that testimony should be enough. A "revelation" that indicates otherwise most certainly comes from a less than exalted source

Glenn

 

 

I was just being a bit facetious there. That God does not give conflicting revelations was actually my point. I believe that God is in control of His Church and and His prophets. I agree with your points.

 

Glenn

 

[jchristopher]

I was just being a bit facetious there. That God does not give conflicting revelations was actually my point. I believe that God is in control of His Church and and His prophets. I agree with your points.

 

Lol! Sorry Glenn, I read your post totally wrong. I was skimming and apparently only got the trimmings of what you said. Ha ha

[Doctrine 612]

Prophets aren't supposed to get personal revelation to each and every individual member, that is up to us, Prophets and others teach us how to receive personal revelation

We must condition ourselves.

Each of us must stay in condition to respond to inspiration and the promptings of the Holy Ghost. The Lord has a way of pouring pure intelligence into our minds to prompt us, to guide us, to teach us, and to warn us. Each son or daughter of God can know the things they need to know instantly. Learn to receive and act on inspiration and revelation. (May 2013 Ensign, These Things I Know, By President Boyd K. Packer)

I love the word condition, since it shows that things like the spirit come at us line upon line, and that we can grow to receive more inspiration and knowledge as we get stronger spiritually.

[Rivers]

They also give us revelation of commandments for PERSONAL salvation -- the WoW, garments, etc. I agree that we are invited to pray for personal revelation as to these things, but in the absence of such, I think we're supposed to comply anyway, right?

True. However, President Uchdorf recently validated those who take alternative paths based on their own spiritual convictions.

From his talk "Come Join with Us:"

"In this Church that honors personal agency so strongly, that was restored by a young man who asked questions and sought answers, we respect those who honestly search for truth. It may break our hearts when their journey takes them away from the Church we love and the truth we have found, but we honor their right to worship Almighty God according to the dictates of their own conscience, just as we claim that privilege for ourselves."

[Bikeemikey]

In light of the above, please explain the following:

42 And it came to pass that Alma was appointed to be the first chief judge, he being also the high priest, his father having conferred the office upon him, and having given him the charge concerning all the affairs of the church. (Alma 29)

and,

6 Behold, thou art Nephi, and I am God. Behold, I declare it unto thee in the presence of mine angels, that ye shall have power over this people, and shall smite the earth with famine, and with pestilence, and destruction, according to the wickedness of this people.

7 Behold, I give unto you power, that whatsoever ye shall seal on earth shall be sealed in heaven; and whatsoever ye shall loose on earth shall be loosed in heaven; and thus shall ye have power among this people. (Helaman 10)

and,

I, Alma, having been consecrated by my father, Alma, to be a high priest over the church of God, he having power and authority from God to do these things, behold, I say unto you that he began to establish a church in the land which was in the borders of Nephi; yea, the land which was called the land of Mormon; yea, and he did baptize his brethren in the waters of Mormon. (Alma 5)

Perhaps you didn't read my post closely. I stated that they did talk about having priests etc, what they lacked was the origin of their authority for such.

Can you provide me with a pre-Christ source of Priesthood authority in the BOM?

Cheers.

[Pahoran]

I would take a close look at Matt. 21: 35-37

 

35.And the husbandmen took his servants and beat one and killed another and stoned another.

 

36.Again he sent other servants more than the first: and they did unto them likewise.

 

37. But last of all he sent unto them his son, saying, They will reverence my son.

 

Also see Matt. 13: 24-30 and see if you can find the "restoration" being spelled out in that parable. It isn't there.

 

The scriptures do indeed speak of a restoration, just not in the manner that the LDS church wants to portray it. 

 

See also 1 Corinthians 4:9

 

"9. For I think that God hath set forth us the Apostles last, as it were appointed unto death: for we are made a spectacle unto the world, and unto angels, and unto men."

Okay, so you've cited two passages that you assume contradict revealed LDS doctrine.

But what you've failed to realise is that the only intepretation that enables them to be used as anti-Mormon prooftexts is when we interpret that "last" as absolute.

But if the "last" in Matthew 21 is the absolute "last," then it clearly contradicts 1 Corinthians 4:9.

Who was "last," Palerider? Jesus or the apostles?

Now I don't believe there is a contradiction there; I see the "last" in both passages as being relative, not absolute. It simply means "latest, most recent," i.e. at the time those statements were made.

Which means that neither passage contradicts any LDS doctrine, does it?

Regards,

Pahoran

Edited May 19, 2014 by Pahoran

[mormonnewb]

We must condition ourselves.

Each of us must stay in condition to respond to inspiration and the promptings of the Holy Ghost. The Lord has a way of pouring pure intelligence into our minds to prompt us, to guide us, to teach us, and to warn us. Each son or daughter of God can know the things they need to know instantly. Learn to receive and act on inspiration and revelation. (May 2013 Ensign, These Things I Know, By President Boyd K. Packer)

I love the word condition, since it shows that things like the spirit come at us line upon line, and that we can grow to receive more inspiration and knowledge as we get stronger spiritually.

Yet, how do we stay in "shape" when we have so few opportunities to exercise our personal revelation because the Brethren have already done it for us? They've picked out our clothing for us, told us what we may not drink with breakfast, advised us what to read at the breakfast table (our scriptures), encouraged us as to who should leave the house for work (the man), and it's not even 8 o'clock yet. Aren't we really just all running on auto-prophet?

[teddyaware]

Perhaps you didn't read my post closely. I stated that they did talk about having priests etc, what they lacked was the origin of their authority for such.

Can you provide me with a pre-Christ source of Priesthood authority in the BOM?

Cheers.

In the Book of Mormon it is made perfectly clear that valid priesthood authority was possessed by the Nephite Prophets. While it's true that in Mormon's abridgement the origins of Nephite priesthood authority are somewhat shrouded in sacred mystery, the fact is the Nephite Prophets testified that they possessed actual priesthood line authority from God.

 

It needs to be remembered that the heavens were wide open to the Nephite Prophets and as the Book of Mormon itself testifies, these holy men communed with angelic visitants on an ongoing basis. So whether Father Lehi or Alma the Older had the priesthood authority they possessed conferred upon them by mortals -- like the Prophet Jeremiah in the case of Nephi, or by righteous Zeniff in the case of Alma -- or by one or more of the many angelic visitants who often communed with the Nephite priesthood leaders, it makes no difference. Again, the Nephite prophets testified that they held legitimate priesthood authority and I, for one, believe them.

 

Examine the account of Father Lehi's vision of Jesus Christ, and of God the Father seated in glory upon the throne of eternal glory, and a fair-minded person will concede it's likely Melchizedek Priesthood authority could have easily been bestowed upon him at the time of that vision, in much the same manner that priesthood authority was conferred upon Joseph and Oliver by angelic ministrants...

14 And it came to pass that when my father had read and seen many great and marvelous things (during his great vision of the Father and the Son), he did exclaim many things unto the Lord; such as: Great and marvelous are thy works, O Lord God Almighty! Thy throne is high in the heavens, and thy power, and goodness, and mercy are over all the inhabitants of the earth; and, because thou art merciful, thou wilt not suffer those who come unto thee that they shall perish!

15 And after this manner was the language of my father in the praising of his God; for his soul did rejoice, and his whole heart was filled, because of the things which he had seen, yea, which the Lord had shown unto him.

16 And now I, Nephi, do not make a full account of the things which my father hath written, for he hath written many things which he saw in visions and in dreams; and he also hath written many things which he prophesied and spake unto his children, of which I shall not make a full account. (1 Nephi 1)

 

Most significantly, it is right after this great vision that we read the following:

18 Therefore, I would that ye should know, that after the Lord had shown so many marvelous things unto my father, Lehi, yea, concerning the destruction of Jerusalem, behold he went forth among the people, and began to prophesy and to declare unto them concerning the things which he had both seen and heard.

19 And it came to pass that the Jews did mock him because of the things which he testified of them; for he truly testified of their wickedness and their abominations; and he testified that the things which he saw and heard, and also the things which he read in the book, manifested plainly of the coming of a Messiah, and also the redemption of the world.

20 And when the Jews heard these things they were angry with him; yea, even as with the prophets of old, whom they had cast out, and stoned, and slain; and they also sought his life, that they might take it away. But behold, I, Nephi, will show unto you that the tender mercies of the Lord are over all those whom he hath chosen (Lehi was chosen of the Lord to be one of His authorized mouthpieces), because of their faith, to make them mighty even unto the power of deliverance. (1 Nephi1)

 

So is it a coincidence that right after Lehi's great heavenly visitation, during which the Lord commanded him to prophesy of Christ to the wicked inhabitants of Jerusalem (1 Nephi 2:1), that he was called a Prophet by his son Nephi?

 

There is so much more I could say and will say if needed, but this will suffice for now.

Edited May 19, 2014 by teddyaware

[Duncan]

Yet, how do we stay in "shape" when we have so few opportunities to exercise our personal revelation because the Brethren have already done it for us? They've picked out our clothing for us, told us what we may not drink with breakfast, advised us what to read at the breakfast table (our scriptures), encouraged us as to who should leave the house for work (the man), and it's not even 8 o'clock yet. Aren't we really just all running on auto-prophet?

 

When has Pres. Monson said any of that since becoming the Prophet? Do you need revelation to tell you what to wear, drink at breakfast, to read or not read at breakfast and who does the housework?

[teddyaware]

Yet, how do we stay in "shape" when we have so few opportunities to exercise our personal revelation because the Brethren have already done it for us? They've picked out our clothing for us, told us what we may not drink with breakfast, advised us what to read at the breakfast table (our scriptures), encouraged us as to who should leave the house for work (the man), and it's not even 8 o'clock yet. Aren't we really just all running on auto-prophet?

Why am I not at all surprised you would say this? Some may be on auto-prophet, as you say, because of woeful ignorance of the divine will due to very poor prayer and scripture study habits; but I, for one, am having a spiritual growth experience that in diametric opposition to what you describe. I've said it before and I'll say it again, one must become a prophet in his or her own right before any of this will start to make any consistent sense.

Edited May 19, 2014 by teddyaware

[mormonnewb]

When has Pres. Monson said any of that since becoming the Prophet? Do you need revelation to tell you what to wear, drink at breakfast, to read or not read at breakfast and who does the housework?

Apparently, we do need revelation about such things because previous prophets have spoken to each of the issues I referenced above and many that I didn't. In fact, wasn't it our beloved Pres. Hinckley who delivered the revelation about the Lord's proper number of earrings (for women only)?

If HF is speaking to the Prophet about whether I should put a whole in my ear lobe is there much else for HF to discuss with ME?

[mormonnewb]

Why am I not at all surprised you would say this? Some may be on auto-prophet, as you say, because of woeful ignorance of the divine will due to very poor prayer and scripture study habits; but I, for one, am having a spiritual growth experience that in diametric opposition to what you describe. I've said it before and I'll say it again, one must become a prophet in his or her own right before any of this will start to make any consistent sense.

But doesn't that make the Brethren redundant?

[CV75]

If HF is speaking to the Prophet about whether I should put a whole in my ear lobe is there much else for HF to discuss with ME?

Of course! Your sorry life can't be THAT empty! Take a look at D&C 59:3-4, which is about general and personal revelation.

 

RE: President Hinckley, he did give the earring counsel somewhat reluctantly since people actually kept pestering him about it (anybody have that quote?)!

[Duncan]

Apparently, we do need revelation about such things because previous prophets have spoken to each of the issues I referenced above and many that I didn't. In fact, wasn't it our beloved Pres. Hinckley who delivered the revelation about the Lord's proper number of earrings (for women only)?

If HF is speaking to the Prophet about whether I should put a whole in my ear lobe is there much else for HF to discuss with ME?

 

We believe in Modern prophets not dead ones! if God cares what you are putting or not putting in your ear lobes, I wonder and stand awestruck he knows that about me! If he knows about the death of a sparrow surely he knows about the big things in life and our lives

 

How do you know it was a revelation that caused Pres. Hinckley to say what he said about earrings?

[teddyaware]

But doesn't that make the Brethren redundant?

Is it redundant that Jesus called twelve Apostles, rather than just one? Why didn't He just call Peter to be his spokesman and leave it at that? Why "confuse" and "complicate" things with all those additional prophets, seers and revelators when just one will do the trick.

But to answer your question in an ultimate sense (hopefully this will satisfy you): The Apostle Paul does teach us that when we become eternally perfect, as joint heirs with Christ, there will no longer be a need for Apostles and Prophets to help lead, guide and protect the Church...

10 He that descended is the same also that ascended up far above all heavens, that he might fill all things.)

11 And he gave some, apostles; and some, prophets; and some, evangelists; and some, pastors and teachers;

12 For the perfecting of the saints, for the work of the ministry, for the edifying of the body of Christ:

13 TILL we all come in the unity of the faith, and of the knowledge of the Son of God, unto a perfect man, unto the measure of the stature of the fulness of Christ:

14 That we henceforth be no more children, tossed to and fro, and carried about with every wind of doctrine, by the sleight of men, and cunning craftiness, whereby they lie in wait to deceive; (Eph 4)

 

So here's the answer to your question: Though each member of the Church has a responsibility to become a prophet in his or her own right, living Apostolic revelators will remain at the head of the Church to help lead, guide and protect the bride of Christ UNTIL each member who is able to do so becomes a perfect man or woman by attaining the measure of the stature of the fullness of Christ. So to use a somewhat silly analogy, the living Apostles and Prophets are training wheels TILL we learn how to ride the celestial mountain bike to the top of Mount Zion on our own by the power of the Holy Ghost. So in a sense you're question is on the right track.

Edited May 19, 2014 by teddyaware

[mormonnewb]

We believe in Modern prophets not dead ones! if God cares what you are putting or not putting in your ear lobes, I wonder and stand awestruck he knows that about me! If he knows about the death of a sparrow surely he knows about the big things in life and our lives

How do you know it was a revelation that caused Pres. Hinckley to say what he said about earrings?

I don't know if it was revelation or not. Here is what he SAID:

"We—the First Presidency and the Council of the Twelve—have taken the position, and I quote, that “the Church discourages tattoos. It also discourages the piercing of the body for other than medical purposes, although it takes no position on the minimal piercing of the ears by women for one pair of earrings.”"

Does it really get much more official than this? The First Presidency, the Twelve and at least one of the Marriotts signed off on this one. Add in a member of the John Birch Society and this would be in the D&C (or at least, the Ensign).

Seriously, I don't think that the earring issue is one that rises to the pay grade of the Holy Spirit. If I kneeled to pray on this issue, I would fully expect the Spirit to either ignore me outright or very clearly state, "Grow up!" Because this is exactly what I would do if my ADULT son came to me for guidance as to whether to get a tattoo across his face. I would just shake my head and say, "Grow up!" If a full grown MAN can't make such a simple decision, then there really isn't much chance for him when the real decisions in life start.

However, in our church, it seems that we don't need to go to HF with this question because someone has already beat us to Him and asked the question for us. So I guess I should have named the thread, "Is the Holy Spirit redundant?" Because if prophets are already asking the questions and they have the final word, why are the rest of us even bothering with personal revelation?