Question Of Why There Doesn't Seem To Be Any New Revelation

[Senator]

The Church as a generalized whole.  Members on this board frequently dismiss or disavow deeper doctrines revealed by Joseph and Brigham.

 

How can you possiby qualify that?  By a handfull of member on an obscure internet forum?

[ERayR]

The Church as a generalized whole.  Members on this board frequently dismiss or disavow deeper doctrines revealed by Joseph and Brigham.

 

Yes indeed it seems poor Brigham has fallen out of favor and never spoke as a prophet but always spoke as Brigham only.  Of course that is what happens when people can't abide what the prophet teaches and refuse to even consider it.

[ERayR]

How can you possiby qualify that?  By a handfull of member on an obscure internet forum?

 

And sitting in gospel doctrine class and High Priest quorum meeting.  Once you have traveled a bit its not hard.

[JLHPROF]

How can you possiby qualify that?  By a handfull of member on an obscure internet forum?

 

No, by the refusal of Church leaders to own up to the revealed truths.

 

Joseph reveals that God was once a man like us and that we can become a God exactly like he is.  Lorenzo Snow coins a little couplet to simplify it for easy understanding.

 

Do we own this revelation?  Do we canonize it?  Do the majority of members even believe it?

 

Brigham reveals that Heavenly Father came to earth as Adam.  He claims that he was taught it by Joseph Smith.  It is adopted into the temple endowment ceremony.

Do we own this revelation?  No, we throw it out, come up with alternate theories and label it a heresy, despite the fact that there is no evidence of it being heretical in any way.

 

Joseph reveals the law of consecration.  Do we keep trying to live it until we perfect it?  No, we get given the lesser law of tithing and still manage to grumble regularly about paying even 10%.

 

Joseph restores and Brigham reveals the patriarchal order of marriage.  We leave it as a possibility for God to want, but remove most of the doctrinal teachings surrounding it  and claim Brigham corrupted it.

 

 

The simple fact is, God gave us the King Follett teachings, Adam-God, Consecration, and plural marriage.  All were revealed through God's representative and are definitely deeper doctrines.  Which ones are openly, publicly and deeply taught by the Church as being necessary or even from God?

[Senator]

And sitting in gospel doctrine class and High Priest quorum meeting.  Once you have traveled a bit its not hard.

 

Hmmm....that has not been my observation. In fact I'm often suprised at the unflinching acceptance of most of the traditional and "mysterious" teachings of the early leaders.

[ERayR]

Hmmm....that has not been my observation. In fact I'm often suprised at the unflinching acceptance of most of the traditional and "mysterious" teachings of the early leaders.

 

I find it depends on just what is presented and how it is offered up.  If one can tie it to present beliefs and show a logical connection usually it goes pretty well.  However, some are are not so accepting.

 

Edited to add:  Some things are pretty hard for me to tie in yet.

Edited September 1, 2014 by ERayR

[teddyaware]

This question has been asked a couple of times on this board.  Joseph Smith and Brigham Young said it was because the people would not receive it.  It was this general disbelief among the Mormons themselves which caused Joseph Smith, as well as Brigham Young, so much apprehension and difficulty in teaching new doctrines

 

. . . there has been a great difficulty in getting anything into the heads of this generation. It has been like splitting hemlock knots with a corn-dogger for a wedge, and a pumpkin for a beetle. Even the Saints are slow to understand. I have tried for a number of years to get the minds of the Saints prepared to receive the things of God; but we frequently see some of them after suffering all they have for the work of God, will fly to pieces like glass as soon as anything comes that is contrary to their traditions; they cannot stand the fire at all. (TPJS, p. 331)

 

   When the principle of baptism for the dead was announced by Joseph Smith, the Mormons themselves seemed the most distraught. Once, plural marriage was hinted at in    a sermon by Joseph Smith, and in the afternoon he had to modify it because of the pressures put upon him. It was this sort of mental reservation that caused the Prophet to remark:

 

   There are a great many wise men, and women, too, in our midst, who are too wise to be taught; therefore, they must die in their ignorance, and in the resurrection they will find their mistake. (TPJS, p. 309)

 

I think that is still the problem and answers the question as to why we are not (as a church) receiving new and glorious revelation.

There's another factor in all this that's not yet been mentioned: It's not just the unprepared members who would give the General Authorities pause to disseminate new doctrine, but it's the non-members as well. For good or ill, we're all now living in the age of the internet, and if the leaders announce some new and groundbreaking revelation, you can bet your bottom dollar it would cause a media circus of epic proportions. Mockery, sacrilege and blasphemy would sweep through all forms of communication media like a mighty soul-sickening electronic flood. It would be like an omnipresent version of the Trey Parker and Matt Stone Book of Mormon play on steroids. And who can deny that there are legions of anti-Mormons out there who are ever in the ready to pounce, slash and burn. 

Come to think of it, this might very well be the mechanism the Lord uses to completely bring the Church out of any remaining obscurity, so that world might be judged and saints tested to the limit as they were in the days of Joseph and Brigham.

Edited September 1, 2014 by teddyaware

[Senator]

No, by the refusal of Church leaders to own up to the revealed truths.

 

Joseph reveals that God was once a man like us and that we can become a God exactly like he is.  Lorenzo Snow coins a little couplet to simplify it for easy understanding.

 

Do we own this revelation?  Do we canonize it?  Do the majority of members even believe it?

 

Brigham reveals that Heavenly Father came to earth as Adam.  He claims that he was taught it by Joseph Smith.  It is adopted into the temple endowment ceremony.

Do we own this revelation?  No, we throw it out, come up with alternate theories and label it a heresy, despite the fact that there is no evidence of it being heretical in any way.

 

Joseph reveals the law of consecration.  Do we keep trying to live it until we perfect it?  No, we get given the lesser law of tithing and still manage to grumble regularly about paying even 10%.

 

Joseph restores and Brigham reveals the patriarchal order of marriage.  We leave it as a possibility for God to want, but remove most of the doctrinal teachings surrounding it  and claim Brigham corrupted it.

 

 

The simple fact is, God gave us the King Follett teachings, Adam-God, Consecration, and plural marriage.  All were revealed through God's representative and are definitely deeper doctrines.  Which ones are openly, publicly and deeply taught by the Church as being necessary or even from God?

Now you're challenging me to take up the role of apologist. That's foreign territory for me!

[ERayR]

There's another factor in all this that's not yet been mentioned: It's not just the unprepared members who would give the General Authorities pause to disseminate new doctrine, but it's the non-members as well. For good or ill, we're all now living in the age of the internet, and if the leaders announce some new and groundbreaking revelation, you can bet your bottom dollar it would cause a media circus of epic proportions. Mockery, sacrilege and blasphemy would sweep through all forms of communication media like a mighty soul-sickening electronic flood. It would be like an omnipresent version of the Trey Parker and Matt Stone Book of Mormon play on steroids.

Come to think of it, this might very well be the mechanism the Lord uses to completely bring the Church out of any remaining obscurity, so that world might be judged and saints tested to the limit as they were in the days of Joseph and Brigham.

 

I do not think God much cares that the critics and antis would rant if the saints would just abide sound doctrine,

Edited September 1, 2014 by ERayR

[teddyaware]

I do not think God much cares that the critics and antis would rant if the saints would just abide sound doctrine,

But point is there are likely a great many active Latter-day Saints who would lament the day that God commanded the living Prophet to reveal anew a very controversial and easy to misunderstand doctrine that most of the non-LDS world would just love to mock, scorn, ridicule and blaspheme.

Edited September 1, 2014 by teddyaware

[JLHPROF]

But point is there are likely a great many active Latter-day Saints who would lament the day that God commanded the living Prophet to reveal anew a very controversial and easy to misunderstand doctrine that

most of the non-LDS world would just love to mock, scorn, ridicule and blaspheme.

 

This is true, and extremely sad.

Image vs. Truth.

I know which we should value more.

[ERayR]

But point is there are likely a great many active Latter-day Saints who would lament the day that God commanded the living Prophet to reveal anew a very controversial and easy to misunderstand doctrine that most of the non-LDS world would just love to mock, scorn, ridicule and blaspheme.

 

Yep right back to my OP and then right on over to Nephi's great and spacious building.

[Maidservant]

I think this is a blessing.  Everyone gets as much as they want.  If they don't want it, they aren't condemned by it, and they are blessed by what they do have (milk for children).

 

We already have everything we need to live in a celestial community, if we will.  It doesn't take systems. It doesn't take the correct mileage from here to Kolob.  It takes changed hearts.  No system works with impure hearts.  Almost any system, and no system needed at all, for pure hearts.

 

But the trouble is--we will not (live in celestial).  And this is not just the church (who might could be said to be at terrestrial or celestial in some places or in individual families perhaps), but the world at large that is still at telestial or hell.

 

I don't want to be told my revelations from the pulpit.  I go to the temple, pray, read scriptures, and ponder my life experiences and I receive my own revelations.  ALL the revelations are available to ALL the people in the temple.  They are there.  They are not missing.  There is no reason to unfold them from the pulpit, which has another function (the church is an Aaronic priesthood system).  They are meant to be unfolded IN US--in the fleshy tables of the heart.  WE are the revelation of God to the world, if we live it.

 

Besides--the highest revelation for entering the celestial kingdom, President Uchtdorf gave recently anyway, and we loved it and ate it up.  What else do we need?

 

It was when he said, "Stop it!"

 

The whole point of being celestial is being our own prophet.  If we need the prophet to do that for us, we'll never get it.

Edited September 1, 2014 by Maidservant

[ERayR]

I think this is a blessing.  Everyone gets as much as they want.  If they don't want it, they aren't condemned by it, and they are blessed by what they do have (milk for children).

 

We already have everything we need to live in a celestial community, if we will.  It doesn't take systems. It doesn't take the correct mileage from here to Kolob.  It takes changed hearts.  No system works with impure hearts.  Almost any system, and no system needed at all, for pure hearts.

 

But the trouble is--we will not (live in celestial).  And this is not just the church (who might could be said to be at terrestrial or celestial in some places or in individual families perhaps), but the world at large that is still at telestial or hell.

 

I don't want to be told my revelations from the pulpit.  I go to the temple, pray, read scriptures, and ponder my life experiences and I receive my own revelations.  ALL the revelations are available to ALL the people in the temple.  They are there.  They are not missing.  There is no reason to unfold them from the pulpit, which has another function (the church is an Aaronic priesthood system).  They are meant to be unfolded IN US--in the fleshy tables of the heart.  WE are the revelation of God to the world, if we live it.

 

Besides--the highest revelation for entering the celestial kingdom, President Uchtdorf gave recently anyway, and we loved it and ate it up.  What else do we need?

 

It was when he said, "Stop it!"

 

The whole point of being celestial is being our own prophet.  If we need the prophet to do that for us, we'll never get it.

 

The problem is you can not or will not advance beyond what you will accept.  I have no doubt we have enough to make the Celestial Kingdom without the slightest idea what is beyond the door way.

 

The OP was about church members, not the world. 

 

There are some things that at some point must come over the pulpit from a prophet or it does not get revealed. 

 

The Church is administered by the Melchizedek Priesthood.  The exalting ordinances can not be administered by the Aaronic Priesthood.

[Tsuzuki]

The OP was about church members, not the world.

There are some things that at some point must come over the pulpit from a prophet or it does not get revealed.

Stop worrying about what other people are or aren't getting, and focus on your own reactions to the truths that are all around you. Edited September 1, 2014 by Tsuzuki

[ERayR]

Stop worrying about what other people are or aren't getting, and focus on your own reactions to the truths that are all around you.

 

Don't try and take this thread off topic.

[Tsuzuki]

Don't try and take this thread off topic.

It's not off topic. The church has sufficient for its actual purpose.

[ERayR]

It's not off topic. The church has sufficient for its actual purpose.

 

But not all we could have. 

[Maidservant]

The problem is you can not or will not advance beyond what you will accept.  I have no doubt we have enough to make the Celestial Kingdom without the slightest idea what is beyond the door way.

 

The OP was about church members, not the world. 

 

There are some things that at some point must come over the pulpit from a prophet or it does not get revealed. 

 

The Church is administered by the Melchizedek Priesthood.  The exalting ordinances can not be administered by the Aaronic Priesthood.

 

When I said the 'church' I was thinking of the ward church, which is Aaronic (Bishop), and which is where everyone enters in at the gate.  So, coming in at the gate, at church (ward Sundays, and ward community living [which is actually celestial], they can be fed in a way that is good for those starting out (and we all need those reminders, too; sometimes we make it too complicated).  Saying something 'mysteriously exaltive' in general conference doesn't help those newly coming in at the gate.  In any case, the only thing exaltive is true and actual love, and babies can do that, old people can do that, members can do that, non-members can do that, teenagers can do that, etc--if we will.  It's not a mystery, it's just a process.  But binding our hearts together as one is the celestial kingdom (as I understand, anyway).  I agree that a person cannot advance beyond what they won't accept in the first place.  Yep.

 

I can only disagree that saying it out loud to the general population of the church at a general conference pulpit constitutes the litmus for whether something got revealed.  If you have the revelation in the temple, then maybe that's where it is meant to be at.  That's where it gets delivered, that's where it gets heard.  That's from where it gets lived.  The prophet is in charge of the temple, too.  People who get that revelation from the temple are bound by it; those who don't, aren't.

 

I do have a--slight -- idea what is behind the doorway.  So do you.  Most of us want it to be more fantastical than it is.  It's just going to be real life only without problems of safety, hatred, etc.

[ERayR]

I can only disagree that saying it out loud to the general population of the church at a general conference pulpit constitutes the litmus for whether something got revealed.  If you have the revelation in the temple, then maybe that's where it is meant to be at.  That's where it gets delivered, that's where it gets heard.  That's from where it gets lived.  The prophet is in charge of the temple, too.  People who get that revelation from the temple are bound by it; those who don't, aren't.

 

I do have a--slight -- idea what is behind the doorway.  So do you.  Most of us want it to be more fantastical than it is.  It's just going to be real life only without problems of safety, hatred, etc.

 

Note:  I said "There are some things that at some point must come over the pulpit from a prophet or it does not get revealed".  I can have multiple revelations, in or out of the temple, about some things but they will never authoritatively get to the general Church population until the prophet reveals it over the pulpit inn general conference.

Edited September 1, 2014 by ERayR

[cinepro]

This question has been asked a couple of times on this board.  Joseph Smith and Brigham Young said it was because the people would not receive it.  It was this general disbelief among the Mormons themselves which caused Joseph Smith, as well as Brigham Young, so much apprehension and difficulty in teaching new doctrines

 

. . . there has been a great difficulty in getting anything into the heads of this generation. It has been like splitting hemlock knots with a corn-dogger for a wedge, and a pumpkin for a beetle. Even the Saints are slow to understand. I have tried for a number of years to get the minds of the Saints prepared to receive the things of God; but we frequently see some of them after suffering all they have for the work of God, will fly to pieces like glass as soon as anything comes that is contrary to their traditions; they cannot stand the fire at all. (TPJS, p. 331)

 

   When the principle of baptism for the dead was announced by Joseph Smith, the Mormons themselves seemed the most distraught. Once, plural marriage was hinted at in    a sermon by Joseph Smith, and in the afternoon he had to modify it because of the pressures put upon him. It was this sort of mental reservation that caused the Prophet to remark:

 

   There are a great many wise men, and women, too, in our midst, who are too wise to be taught; therefore, they must die in their ignorance, and in the resurrection they will find their mistake. (TPJS, p. 309)

 

I think that is still the problem and answers the question as to why we are not (as a church) receiving new and glorious revelation.

 

 

Which Church are you talking about?  From what I can tell, LDS are anxious for "more revelation", and many do whatever they can to receive any bit of guidance and inspiration from our leaders that they can.  The building is always packed for General Conference, and even simple directions such as the number of earrings are enforced with an almost puratinistic zeal.  And if what you said were true, certainly Deseret Book would be long out of business by now, and books such as these would be sitting in boxes in some suburban Utah basement.

 

I can certainly understand the allure of a "blame the members" excuse for the leaders, but I can't understand why the members ourselves would accept such an obviously self-serving explanation.  When did we stop expecting our Church to be different than all the others, and the leaders to be different than all the others?  Every Christian church (and probably most non-Christian ones) believe God is giving them revelation "at the local level."  Our Church was different because God was giving revelations at the highest levels, and they were revelations that were manifested in scriptures and doctrine, not policies and org charts.

[Coreyb]

Why declare your sermons/policies to be revelations and risk the potential mockery when members will declare them revelations for you

[why me]

This question has been asked a couple of times on this board.  Joseph Smith and Brigham Young said it was because the people would not receive it.  It was this general disbelief among the Mormons themselves which caused Joseph Smith, as well as Brigham Young, so much apprehension and difficulty in teaching new doctrines

 

. . . there has been a great difficulty in getting anything into the heads of this generation. It has been like splitting hemlock knots with a corn-dogger for a wedge, and a pumpkin for a beetle. Even the Saints are slow to understand. I have tried for a number of years to get the minds of the Saints prepared to receive the things of God; but we frequently see some of them after suffering all they have for the work of God, will fly to pieces like glass as soon as anything comes that is contrary to their traditions; they cannot stand the fire at all. (TPJS, p. 331)

 

   When the principle of baptism for the dead was announced by Joseph Smith, the Mormons themselves seemed the most distraught. Once, plural marriage was hinted at in    a sermon by Joseph Smith, and in the afternoon he had to modify it because of the pressures put upon him. It was this sort of mental reservation that caused the Prophet to remark:

 

   There are a great many wise men, and women, too, in our midst, who are too wise to be taught; therefore, they must die in their ignorance, and in the resurrection they will find their mistake. (TPJS, p. 309)

 

I think that is still the problem and answers the question as to why we are not (as a church) receiving new and glorious revelation.

I think that the church has been giving revelations to its members. For example, the chasity issue is a revelation. Those who listened to it were certainly less likely to get herpes and Hiv, especially the gay members in the 70s. Also, we have had revelation about porn years ago. That was right on the money as we now know that it is very damaging to a person's sex life and very addictive. We had countless talks about food storage too. But less so now. In other words, the revelations have not been vast and deep but they are there for all to read and follow. And we also have had the proclamation on the family. That sees right on the money too.

 

Seek and ye shall find.

[why me]

The Church as a generalized whole.  Members on this board frequently dismiss or disavow deeper doctrines revealed by Joseph and Brigham.

But I don't think that the church has. The revelations that they received were good for the members at that time. I think that the problem comes from revelation or opinion. If it is not in the canon it is not a revelation. But that claim can work only so far as it is allowed. However, the church is still a revelatory church and if members would follow the guidence given by the GAs they would not go wrong. And that advice covers how to dress, behave, do business, care for the family etc. It is quite comprehensive.

[Senator]

Which Church are you talking about?  From what I can tell, LDS are anxious for "more revelation", and many do whatever they can to receive any bit of guidance and inspiration from our leaders that they can.  The building is always packed for General Conference, and even simple directions such as the number of earrings are enforced with an almost puratinistic zeal.  And if what you said were true, certainly Deseret Book would be long out of business by now, and books such as these would be sitting in boxes in some suburban Utah basement.

 

I'm still finding it remarkable that ERay's inital admission that the church is not receiving any "new and glorious revelations" has been left relatively unassailed. Had that exact OP been made by a "known" critic, I'd be willing to bet a strawberry-bannana milkshake it would have been soundly refuted in the first page, and that the church is receiving every bit of new and glorious revelation as it ever did in the early church.

Edited September 1, 2014 by Senator