Is There Still Room In The Church For "on-The Spot" Doctrinal Revelation?

[JLHPROF]

I may be alone in this but one of the things I love most in Mormonism is the "on-the-spot" doctrinal answers that came without documentation, scriptural backup, or any proof whatsoever.  I find this kind of direct from God answer and inspiration to be encouraging.  I know others don't.

 

So I want to ask - can we still accept such revelation?  Can we accept such things as being true?  And do we lose anything by no longer receiving or accepting these things?

 

A FEW EXAMPLES:

 

"While residing at Kirtland, Elder Reynolds Cahoon had a son born to him. One day when President Joseph Smith was passing his door he called the Prophet in and asked him to bless and name the baby. Joseph did so and gave the boy the name of Mahonri Moriancumer. When he had finished the blessing, he laid the child on the bed, and turning to Elder Cahoon he said, the name I have given your son is the name of the Brother of Jared; the Lord has just shown or revealed it to me. Elder William F. Cahoon, who was standing near heard the Prophet make this statement to his father; and this was the first time the name of the brother of Jared was known in the Church in this dispensation."

 

 

Joseph Smith said, on another occasion, in the hearing of some of the saints still surviving, that the City of Enoch would again take its place in the identical spot from which it had been detached, now forming that chasm of the earth, filled with water, called the Gulf of Mexico.

 

 

Grandfather said, "Joseph, where are the ten tribes?" He said, "Come to the door and I will show you. Come, Sister Brown. I want both of you to see." It being a star light night the Prophet said, "Brother Brown, can you show me the polar star?" "Yes, Sir," he said, pointing up to the North Star. "There it is." "Yes, I know," said the Prophet, "but which one, there are a lot of stars there." Grandfather said, "Can you see the points of the dipper? " The Prophet said, "Yes." "Well," he said, pointing up to the largest star, trace the pointers, that is the North Star."
The Prophet answered, "You are correct." Now he said, pointing toward the star, "Do you discover a little twinkler to the right and below the polar star which you would judge to be about the distance of twenty feet from here?" Grandfather answered, "Yes Sir," The Prophet said, "Sister Brown, do you see that star also?" Her answer was, "Yes Sir." "Very well then," said he, "Let us go in."

 

 

The Prophet Joseph called upon Brother Brigham, myself and others, saying, "Brethren, come, go along with me, and I will show you something," He led us a short distance to a place where were the ruins of three altars built of stone, one above the other, and one standing a little back of the other, like unto the pulpits in the Kirtland Temple, representing the order of three grades of Priesthood; "There," said Joseph, "is the place where Adam offered up sacrifice after he was cast out of the garden." The altar stood at the highest point of the bluff. I went and examined the place several times while I remained there. (Life of Heber C. Kimball  , pp. 209-210)

Edited September 8, 2014 by JLHPROF

[strappinglad]

I don't think there has been a prophet since Joseph that has had his ease and familiarity with this type of direct revelation as quoted . Everything was new and needed answers quickly in order for the foundations of the kingdom to be established. Joseph seemed to be on a " first name basis" with heavenly messengers.

[cinepro]

I may be alone in this but one of the things I love most in Mormonism is the "on-the-spot" doctrinal answers that came without documentation, scriptural backup, or any proof whatsoever.  I find this kind of direct from God answer and inspiration to be encouraging.  I know others don't.

 

So I want to ask - can we still accept such revelation?  Can we accept such things as being true?  And do we lose anything by no longer receiving or accepting these things?

 

 

 

I was told a story on my mission about how Elder McConkie had visited the area in the 1970's, and a Bishop (the person telling me the story) asked him a doctrinal question and Elder McConkie answered it.  The Bishop asked if there was a source for the answer, and Elder McConkie paused and said "I'm the source."

 

But from what I can tell, there's more danger than benefit to having leaders "shooting from the hip" when it comes to doctrinal pronouncements. 

[Paddy]

I may be alone in this but one of the things I love most in Mormonism is the "on-the-spot" doctrinal answers that came without documentation, scriptural backup, or any proof whatsoever. I find this kind of direct from God answer and inspiration to be encouraging. I know others don't.

One issue with it is that it is still causing debate and disaffection to this day. I much prefer the thought out revelations given by Joseph and others that are found in canonical sources. Having said that though "on the spot" revelation does have a certain type of charismatic feel to it that does create a righteous desire.

[JLHPROF]

Thank you to everyone so far who has answered as to the merits of this kind of revelation.

 

But what about the other part of the question?  Would we be able to accept anything like this today?  We can barely tolerate it from Joseph, if Pres. Monson did this would it be accepted?

[Ahab]

Thank you to everyone so far who has answered as to the merits of this kind of revelation.

But what about the other part of the question? Would we be able to accept anything like this today? We can barely tolerate it from Joseph, if Pres. Monson did this would it be accepted?

For me it would depend on what was said and whether or not our Father gave me his assurance about what was said. I don't take any man's word for anything without my getting an assurance from God to confirm it.

[Storm Rider]

I still rely on the Holy Spirit for confirmation.  I am extremely open to leaders who are prepared to reveal truth, but I accept those truths at the direction of the Holy Spirit.  I suspect that it was the same in the days of Joseph as it was in the days of the ancient prophets or even when Christ dwelt on the earth. 

[The Nehor]

I don't think there has been a prophet since Joseph that has had his ease and familiarity with this type of direct revelation as quoted . Everything was new and needed answers quickly in order for the foundations of the kingdom to be established. Joseph seemed to be on a " first name basis" with heavenly messengers.

 

The only person who might equal Joseph Smith was Wilford Woodruff for familiarity with the other world.

 

But from what I can tell, there's more danger than benefit to having leaders "shooting from the hip" when it comes to doctrinal pronouncements. 

 

Yes, but those answers are fun enough to make it worth it.

 

For me it would depend on what was said and whether or not our Father gave me his assurance about what was said. I don't take any man's word for anything without my getting an assurance from God to confirm it.

 

That sounds great but do you actually practice it? I don't have enough time in the day to verify every speaker at General Conference let alone every talk in Sacrament Meeting.

[JLHPROF]

And yet despite ANY proof, scriptural backing, second witness or official correlation, we pretty much all accept and reteach that the name of the Brother of Jared is Mahonrimoriacumr.  It even gets repeated by leaders.

 

Why then is it so easy to accept this, but to roll our eyes at the idea of the City of Enoch returning to the Gulf of Mexico, or that the 10 tribes are near the North Star?  They have exactly the same level of doctrinal evidence.

 

Do we just pick the things we like?

[Storm Rider]

And yet despite ANY proof, scriptural backing, second witness or official correlation, we pretty much all accept and reteach that the name of the Brother of Jared is Mahonrimoriacumr.  It even gets repeated by leaders.

 

Why then is it so easy to accept this, but to roll our eyes at the idea of the City of Enoch returning to the Gulf of Mexico, or that the 10 tribes are near the North Star?  They have exactly the same level of doctrinal evidence.

 

Do we just pick the things we like?

 

The name of the brother of Jared is not something I think as doctrinal; it is a curiosity, but its teaching has zero impact on salvation. 

[JLHPROF]

The name of the brother of Jared is not something I think as doctrinal; it is a curiosity, but its teaching has zero impact on salvation. 

 

True, but why do we teach it as revelation (no matter how insignificant)?  I personally believe that is his name, but I have no more legitimate evidence to do so than I do to believe any other "on-the-spot" revelation.  It's just an interesting curiosity how we can accept some with no evidence and not accept others.

[The Nehor]

Do we just pick the things we like?

 

Pretty much. I am sure that some of the things we find preposterous will turn out to be true while many of the things we accept as standard will turn out to be interpolations of men and outright errors. People who cannot laugh at themselves are going to have a rough time when they realize how seriously they took a lot of what will turn out to be sheer insanity.

[Hamba Tuhan]

Do we just pick the things we like?

 

I think the process is a bit more complicated than that, involving, as a minimum, the following:

• analysing how information fits with what we already understand/possess (including the Standard Works and both the teachings and the emphases of the living prophets)
• considering the context/provenance
• seeking clarity through the Spirit.

[cinepro]

And yet despite ANY proof, scriptural backing, second witness or official correlation, we pretty much all accept and reteach that the name of the Brother of Jared is Mahonrimoriacumr.  It even gets repeated by leaders.

 

Why then is it so easy to accept this, but to roll our eyes at the idea of the City of Enoch returning to the Gulf of Mexico, or that the 10 tribes are near the North Star?  They have exactly the same level of doctrinal evidence.

 

Do we just pick the things we like?

 

CFR on Joseph Smith teaching that the City of Enoch will "return" to the Gulf of Mexico or that the lost 10 tribes are "near the North Star".

[CV75]

And yet despite ANY proof, scriptural backing, second witness or official correlation, we pretty much all accept and reteach that the name of the Brother of Jared is Mahonrimoriacumr.  It even gets repeated by leaders.

 

Why then is it so easy to accept this, but to roll our eyes at the idea of the City of Enoch returning to the Gulf of Mexico, or that the 10 tribes are near the North Star?  They have exactly the same level of doctrinal evidence.

 

Do we just pick the things we like?

This is why the Lord's servants vet the revelations and propose those we are  bound to by covenant for our common consent.

[JLHPROF]

The quotes are in the OP and can be googled from a dozen different sources, including the BYU website.

[Ahab]

That sounds great but do you actually practice it? I don't have enough time in the day to verify every speaker at General Conference let alone every talk in Sacrament Meeting.

Yes and I don't understand why you or anyone else wouldn't be open to communications from God all of the time, or at least while you are awake.

[Senator]

I may be alone in this but one of the things I love most in Mormonism is the "on-the-spot" doctrinal answers that came without documentation, scriptural backup, or any proof whatsoever.  I find this kind of direct from God answer and inspiration to be encouraging.  I know others don't.

 

So I want to ask - can we still accept such revelation?  Can we accept such things as being true?  And do we lose anything by no longer receiving or accepting these things?

 

A FEW EXAMPLES:

 

Those where good times!

[The Nehor]

Yes and I don't understand why you or anyone else wouldn't be open to communications from God all of the time, or at least while you are awake.

I like to think I am but God does not verify the truth of every conference talk to me and I do not ask for it. I take most of it on trust. Oh, and I listen best when asleep. I am a dreamer.

[Ahab]

I like to think I am but God does not verify the truth of every conference talk to me and I do not ask for it. I take most of it on trust. Oh, and I listen best when asleep. I am a dreamer.

I will rephrase my earlier response to the OP:

Whether or not I accept on-the-spot revelation from God, for me, is dependent on what is said and whether or not God confirms to me that the so-called revelation or any other idea or statement was inspired by Him. I don't take any man's word for anything purporting to be revelation from God without God confirming to me that it actually is revelation from Him. And I don't understand why you or anyone else wouldn't be in communications with God all of the time, even in dreams.

[The Nehor]

I will rephrase my earlier response to the OP:

Whether or not I accept on-the-spot revelation from God, for me, is dependent on what is said and whether or not God confirms to me that the so-called revelation or any other idea or statement was inspired by Him. I don't take any man's word for anything purporting to be revelation from God without God confirming to me that it actually is revelation from Him. And I don't understand why you or anyone else wouldn't be in communications with God all of the time, even in dreams.

Because does not talk to me all the time. I can't make Him do so either.

[Ahab]

Because does not talk to me all the time. I can't make Him do so either.

What part of "I do not accept so-called revelation from God until God confirms he revealed it" do you not understand?

[ERayR]

I may be alone in this but one of the things I love most in Mormonism is the "on-the-spot" doctrinal answers that came without documentation, scriptural backup, or any proof whatsoever.  I find this kind of direct from God answer and inspiration to be encouraging.  I know others don't.

 

So I want to ask - can we still accept such revelation?  Can we accept such things as being true?  And do we lose anything by no longer receiving or accepting these things?

 

A FEW EXAMPLES:

 

Happens all the time in High Priests Group.

[The Nehor]

What part of "I do not accept so-called revelation from God until God confirms he revealed it" do you not understand?

The middle bit.

[Ahab]

The middle bit.

Not sure how to help you understand.