Ezra Taft Benson Talks About The Last Days

[Duncan]

He doesn't have to but as Cinepro quite rightly points out, it would have been just as easy for him to give names, dates and events after 1830 as before. He didn't only have a vision up to 1830 and then a cloud of uncertainty.

Iron Rod and mists of darkness etc. spot on? In what specific way. Certainly it's a parable that many of us can relate to and has lots of useful application to life experiences... But it's not a specific prophecy compared to describing the actual words that a prophet will speak, 600 years into the future or the name of the mother of the promised Messiah.

 

maybe people are putting up false walls and prophecies have to fit their needs rather then the needs of the prophets or the people they are leading or prophesying too, maybe it wasn't given to Nephi to see the internet, the Chicago Bulls how much Brazil sucks at Soccer or stuff like that

 

But check this out 

 

 

Maybe Pres. McKay didn't know what to call it but just could see the impact it would have, we obviously call it the internet but like Isaiah of Old and his vision of trains and transportation and stuff didn't know what to call it but labeled it using words he did know

[Duncan]

I've no problem with you viewing it that way Bobbie. I think the fact that you're having to put it in the context of "those who have ears to hear" shows how vague the prophecy really is.

 

Could anyone misunderstand "600 hundred years from now" as a specificity of a prophecy?

 

 

yeah, I know a lot of people who think we are speeding up or slowing down the 2nd Coming of Christ and only if we are righteous enough then he will come, entirely forgetting about the prophecy about Lehi and Jesus coming in 600 years

[canard78]

If you think about it, the events that have the greatest detail in prophecy in the BOM are the beginning of dispensations.  John and Christ and Joseph Smith.  These were respectively 600 years and around 2400 years after Lehi.  The other big one is the destruction of the Nephites.  It makes sense that all of the great detail in prophecy will be regarding the next big events - second coming, millennium, judgment, celstialization of the earth, etc.   Sure enough, we have them in great detail.  The Nephites did not have a prophecy calendar of current expected events to watch for, why should we?  Most of the events in the BOM were not prophesied and many hundreds of years would go by without any prophecy.  We shouldn't expect it to be different for us.  The fact is, we do have future revelation with great detail, because they (they are many) have not happened yet does not negate the fact that it was given in the same manner of detail that Lehi gave his prophecies which were relatively far in the future.

 

What kind of prophecies should we expect?  "A great prophet named Thomas will lower the age of missionaries from 19 to 18 for men and 21 to 19 for women."  There are no prophecies like that in the BOM either. 

 

The important things about this dispensation have been prophesied about and are being fulfilled - the gosepl will reach every nation, no unhallowed hand can stop the work from progressing, temples will dot the earth before the coming of the Lord (this was said by Brigham after being exiled to Utah and after experiencing all of the difficulties in building the SLC temple which took 40 years!).  We now have 170 temples either constructed or announced which dot the earth.  I suspect that we will get closer to the thousands as both Brigham and Hinckley state.   I wouldn't expect revelation on much more than this.  Revelation is happening like it always has.  I should say that prophetic prediction is happening like it always has (rarely), because prophecy and revelation is not always in prediction form.  We have tons of prophecy and revelation.  

 

The date and details of the restoration of the sealing powers? That was a fairly significant event in the history of the world wasn't it?

The dedication of the first temple? 

The migration to Utah?

The first temple in Europe?

 

There are any number of things that happened after 1830 that the Book of Mormon prophets could have prophesied.

 

Besides all that... compare Lehi, Nephi, King Benjamin and Samuel's messianic prophecy to Isaiah, Jeremiah etc. Then compare them to any prophecy made by Joseph Smith and any LDS prophet since 1830. As I keep repeating, no-one has yet been able to produce a revelation that comes close to the BoM pre-1830 ones.

 

In which case, aren't they a good case for being anachronistic. Their prophecies contain detail that no other prophet before or since has been able to come close to. They have a prophetic style that is unparalleled and unmatched.

[ERayR]

yeah, I know a lot of people who think we are speeding up or slowing down the 2nd Coming of Christ and only if we are righteous enough then he will come, entirely forgetting about the prophecy about Lehi and Jesus coming in 600 years

 

The second coming is not in an era of righteousness but rather in a period of great wickedness.

[Duncan]

The second coming is not in an era of righteousness but rather in a period of great wickedness.

 

 

exactley! like a pregnant woman as Paul says, baby comes when they are ready not when you want them to come! 

Edited January 24, 2015 by Duncan

[bluebell]

I've no problem with you viewing it that way Bobbie. I think the fact that you're having to put it in the context of "those who have ears to hear" shows how vague the prophecy really is.

Could anyone misunderstand "600 hundred years from now" as a specificity of a prophecy?

I admit I have not followed this topic super closely so if my question is not relevant I apologize.

But haven't you dismissed as not being very detailed or impressive a prophecy that essentially said "in 20 years from now..." even though huge events took place in the world almost exactly 20 years later?

Given that, is it really a stretch to believe that other people could think the same thing of a prophecy that says "600 years from now.." even while others see it as blatantly and obviously coming to pass exactly as it said?

[pogi]

The date and details of the restoration of the sealing powers? That was a fairly significant event in the history of the world wasn't it?

The dedication of the first temple? 

The migration to Utah?

The first temple in Europe?

 

There are any number of things that happened after 1830 that the Book of Mormon prophets could have prophesied.

 

Besides all that... compare Lehi, Nephi, King Benjamin and Samuel's messianic prophecy to Isaiah, Jeremiah etc. Then compare them to any prophecy made by Joseph Smith and any LDS prophet since 1830. As I keep repeating, no-one has yet been able to produce a revelation that comes close to the BoM pre-1830 ones.

 

In which case, aren't they a good case for being anachronistic. Their prophecies contain detail that no other prophet before or since has been able to come close to. They have a prophetic style that is unparalleled and unmatched.

 

The only general time frame that I know of that was ever prophesied was the coming of Christ.  Why did not the Jews not have the date and name? Perhaps because he was coming to them to be crucified of them...I don't know it is only speculation.

 

 

1. There is a prophecy about the restoration of the sealing powers with names given (Elijah).  While this was a significant event, it was only part of the restoration which was clearly prophesied about. 

2. There is no evidence of prophecy regarding the dedication of any temple in the bible or BOM, why should we be different?

3. "I prophesied that the Saints would continue to suffer much affliction and would be driven to the Rocky Mountains, many would apostatize, others would be put to death by our persecutors or lose their lives in consequence of exposure or disease, and some of you will live to go and assist in making settlements and build cities and see the Saints become a mighty people in the midst of the Rocky Mountains."

4. See number 2. 

Edited January 24, 2015 by pogi

[carbon dioxide]

By its nature, prophecy is directed and benefits the righteous or those that believe and not towards the wicked

 

1 Corinthians 14:22 "...prophesying serveth not for them that believe not, but for them which believe."

 

Because of that, prophecy is generally going to be somewhat vague so that the wicked are left in the cold on it until it is fulfilled.  Even then the wicked still may be left out in the cold because they refuse to recognize the fulfillment of any prophecy.  Anyway here is another good prophecy from Orson Hyde during the Civil War in May of 1862 that was at least partially fulfulled

 

"Many nations will be drawn into the American maelstrom that now whirls through the land; and after many days, when the demons of war shall have exhausted his strength and madness upon the American soil, by the destruction of all that can court or provoke opposition, excite cupidity, inspire revenge, or feed ambition, he will remove his headquarters to the banks of the Rhine" (Orson Hyde, Millennial Star, Vol 24 p.274).

 

We all know where the Rhine is and what destruction Germany brought to the world in WW1 and WW2.

[canard78]

I admit I have not followed this topic super closely so if my question is not relevant I apologize.

But haven't you dismissed as not being very detailed or impressive a prophecy that essentially said "in 20 years from now..." even though huge events took place in the world almost exactly 20 years later?

Given that, is it really a stretch to believe that other people could think the same thing of a prophecy that says "600 years from now.." even while others see it as blatantly and obviously coming to pass exactly as it said?

Do you mean the Pres Woodruff one?

He doesn't even say "20 years from now." He simply says that "in the next 20 years" there's going to be trouble ahead.

I'm fairly sure it didn't need a prophet to make that sort of prediction given the global political turbulence at the end of the 19thC, moving into the 20th.

[JLHPROF]

Is that the best we've got in the D&C? Given none of that has actually happened then it's not very convincing as a comparison to level of specificity in the Book of Mormon.

 

The more I read the prophecies in the Book of Mormon and then compare them to prophecy from the OT and modern era, the more anachronistic they seem.

Non-BoM prophets appear to have never delivered this level of accuracy and specificity in their prophecy.

Compare the messianic prophecy of Isaiah vs either Lehi or Samuel. Isaiah is beautiful passionate poetry but full of vagaries. Lehi gives names and dates. Samuel gives a time frame and a specific sign.

 

Yes, you're right. All non-BoM prophecy is very vague. But the BoM gives specific dates, names, events. Some of them are not very vague at all. Which makes them seem all the more suspect.

But that's precisely the issue for the BoM. All of the specific prophecies were given and fulfilled before the book's publication in 1830.

 

I'm still sat waiting for a non-BoM prophecy that comes even close to what the BoM prophets could predict with unnerving accuracy about events before 1830. Not seen anything yet.

 

 

There are any number of things that happened after 1830 that the Book of Mormon prophets could have prophesied.

 

 Their prophecies contain detail that no other prophet before or since has been able to come close to. They have a prophetic style that is unparalleled and unmatched.

 

So basically you're saying that either the BOM prophecies are false because they are too specific and only go up to the time the book was published.

 

OR

You are saying that the prophecies that followed in the D&C etc are false because they aren't as specific as the ones in the Book of Mormon.

 

No pleasing some people.  How dare there be two levels of specificity in the prophecies God has given to men?

 

As for "I'm still sat waiting for a non-BoM prophecy that comes even close to what the BoM prophets could predict with unnerving accuracy about events before 1830".  A quick google finds that:

 

- Starfall within 40 days as prophesied by Joseph Smith

- Joseph prophesied that he would not set foot in Missouri again, and didn't despite being captured and their attempts to return him to Missouri.

- Joseph predicted Stephen Douglas would run for President and lose and that's what happened.

- Joseph prophesied that Brigham would lead the Church twice before he was even an apostle, let alone the senior apostle.

- D&C 13 - John the Baptist promises that the Melchezidek Priesthood would be restored shortly.

- D&C 27 and Moroni's visit  - Predicts the priesthood keys being restored by Elijah and others

 

and that doesn't include the non-time specific prophecies that have yet to be fulfilled.

[thesometimesaint]

The Answer my Friend is

[canard78]

So basically you're saying that either the BOM prophecies are false because they are too specific and only go up to the time the book was published.

OR

You are saying that the prophecies that followed in the D&C etc are false because they aren't as specific as the ones in the Book of Mormon.

No pleasing some people. How dare there be two levels of specificity in the prophecies God has given to men?

As for "I'm still sat waiting for a non-BoM prophecy that comes even close to what the BoM prophets could predict with unnerving accuracy about events before 1830". A quick google finds that:

- Starfall within 40 days as prophesied by Joseph Smith

- Joseph prophesied that he would not set foot in Missouri again, and didn't despite being captured and their attempts to return him to Missouri.

- Joseph predicted Stephen Douglas would run for President and lose and that's what happened.

- Joseph prophesied that Brigham would lead the Church twice before he was even an apostle, let alone the senior apostle.

- D&C 13 - John the Baptist promises that the Melchezidek Priesthood would be restored shortly.

- D&C 27 and Moroni's visit - Predicts the priesthood keys being restored by Elijah and others

and that doesn't include the non-time specific prophecies that have yet to be fulfilled.

That's a lot of quoting.

Yes, you're right. I'm basically saying that the prophecy in the BoM bears little resemblance to any type of prophecy in either the Old and New Testament or in the latter-days. And yes, I'm saying that's pretty suspect.

I'm quite open these days about the fact that I think it's more likely that the Book of Mormon is a modern text. Finding what looks like anachronistic styles of prophecy just nudges me a little further in that direction.

[thesometimesaint]

That's a lot of quoting.

Yes, you're right. I'm basically saying that the prophecy in the BoM bears little resemblance to any type of prophecy in either the Old and New Testament or in the latter-days. And yes, I'm saying that's pretty suspect.

I'm quite open these days about the fact that I think it's more likely that the Book of Mormon is a modern text. Finding what looks like anachronistic styles of prophecy just nudges me a little further in that direction.

 

While human names change throughout history the problems human's have don't.

[Avatar4321]

It goes by many names.  Might as well call it Hydra.

summon the Avengers!

[bluebell]

Do you mean the Pres Woodruff one?

He doesn't even say "20 years from now." He simply says that "in the next 20 years" there's going to be trouble ahead.

I'm fairly sure it didn't need a prophet to make that sort of prediction given the global political turbulence at the end of the 19thC, moving into the 20th.

 

Are you trying to suggest that there is a difference between '20 years from now' and 'in the next 20 years'?  

 

Besides that, i don't have a problem with you dismissing it because it doesn't matter to me, but i do think you are illustrating just how easy it is for someone who doesn't have faith in a prophet or his authority to dismiss prophecy or find issues with it.  

 

You asked how someone could misunderstand a prophecy that uses a 600 year timeline-I think you are the perfect example of how someone could easily misunderstand it or dismiss it if they were already doubting that such prophecy was real. 

[Duncan]

Do you mean the Pres Woodruff one?

He doesn't even say "20 years from now." He simply says that "in the next 20 years" there's going to be trouble ahead.

I'm fairly sure it didn't need a prophet to make that sort of prediction given the global political turbulence at the end of the 19thC, moving into the 20th.

 

 

are you kidding?! The immediate causes of the war were largely unknown to the general public in the 1890's, read 'Europe's Last Summer' by David Fromkin. I think by 1894 the Boer war writing was on the wall but the Balkans and WW1 were not largely known, to say nothing about the Spanish Flu epidemic that killed more people than the War did

Edited January 24, 2015 by Duncan

[bluebell]

I'm quite open these days about the fact that I think it's more likely that the Book of Mormon is a modern text. Finding what looks like anachronistic styles of prophecy just nudges me a little further in that direction.

 

For good or ill we almost always find what we think we will find when we are looking for evidence to support our inclinations.  Sometimes i think that's why Jesus spoke so often about not doubting and that we should be believing.  Doubts, like faith, search for validation in everything.  

[JLHPROF]

That's a lot of quoting.

Yes, you're right. I'm basically saying that the prophecy in the BoM bears little resemblance to any type of prophecy in either the Old and New Testament or in the latter-days. And yes, I'm saying that's pretty suspect.

I'm quite open these days about the fact that I think it's more likely that the Book of Mormon is a modern text. Finding what looks like anachronistic styles of prophecy just nudges me a little further in that direction.

 

Just making sure I understood your view - that the Book of Mormon can't be a historical document because you think the specificity in its prophecy is too accurate.

 

Yeah...who are we to put any kind of rules on information given by revelations to the prophets.  Perhaps God wanted Lehi to know that it would be exactly 600 years to Christ and perhaps God didn't want other prophets to have as much detail.

God can reveal with as much specific detail as he wants to whomever he wants.  It's a stretch to say the amount of detail in a prophecy has ANY bearing on its validity.

[bluebell]

are you kidding?! The immediate causes of the war were largely unknown to the general public in the 1890's, read 'Europe's Last Summer' by David Fromkin. I think by 1894 the Boer war writing was on the wall but the Balkans and WW1 were not largely known, to say nothing about the Spanish Flu epidemic that killed more people than the War did

 

Canard might have studied the WWI so i don't want to speak against his knowledge, but i have found that typically, unless someone has the WW's as a personal hobby, only those who have taken college courses on them or have gotten a degree in history have even a cursory understanding on what a surprise the first WW was.  Europe had been fighting amidst itself for centuries-some really bloody and bad wars-yet none of them had ever produced the kind of global carnage that the WWs did and before WW1 existed, no one had any reason to believe a war could grow to the level that those did because there was no precedent for it.

[Duncan]

Canard might have studied the WWI so i don't want to speak against his knowledge, but i have found that typically, unless someone has the WW's as a personal hobby, only those who have taken college courses on them or have gotten a degree in history have even a cursory understanding on what a surprise the first WW was.  Europe had been fighting amidst itself for centuries-some really bloody and bad wars-yet none of them had ever produced the kind of global carnage that the WWs did and before WW1 existed, no one had any reason to believe a war could grow to the level that those did because there was no precedent for it.

 

 

I have those credentials and yeah, it happened rather quickly-it's so sad, all that destruction and death

[canard78]

are you kidding?! The immediate causes of the war were largely unknown to the general public in the 1890's, read 'Europe's Last Summer' by David Fromkin. I think by 1894 the Boer war writing was on the wall but the Balkans and WW1 were not largely known, to say nothing about the Spanish Flu epidemic that killed more people than the War did

Have you even read the prophecy? Nothing at all is even mentioned about the war at all. It's just saying it's going to be a disruptive 20 years.

[Duncan]

Have you even read the prophecy? Nothing at all is even mentioned about the war at all. It's just saying it's going to be a disruptive 20 years.

 

 

yes I have and yes it was! 

[omni]

I admit I have not followed this topic super closely so if my question is not relevant I apologize.

But haven't you dismissed as not being very detailed or impressive a prophecy that essentially said "in 20 years from now..." even though huge events took place in the world almost exactly 20 years later?

Given that, is it really a stretch to believe that other people could think the same thing of a prophecy that says "600 years from now.." even while others see it as blatantly and obviously coming to pass exactly as it said?

 

Take a look again at the prophecy from President Woodruff, it makes no mention of a war.

 

"I have a vision of the night opened continually before my eyes, and can see the might judgments that are about to be poured out upon the world... God has held the angels of destruction for many years, lest they should reap down the wheat with the tares.  But I want to tell you now, that those angels have left the portals of heaven, and they stand over this people and this nation now,  and are hovering over the earth waiting to pour out the judgments...Great changes are at our doors.  The next twenty years will see mighty changes among the nations of the earth.  You will live to see these things." (Young Women's journal, Vol 5, No. 11)

 

 

A close reading the prophecy reveals that President Woodruff could have been referring to a number of events including a large famine, a series of natural disasters, an economic downturn, etc.  If you do believe the prophecy is referring to WWI, did HF inspire Gavrilo Princip to assassinate Franz Ferdinand setting off a series of events that led to WWI?  Had this same prophecy been given 20 years later we would have been discussing the prophet's ability to predict the great depression, twenty years after that the ability to predict WWII, twenty years after that his ability to predict the Cold War and the sexual revelation, twenty years after that his ability to predict the predict the global war on terror and the Great Recession.  

 

In fact, I'll make a prophecy of my own and even be willing to make it more specific my mentioning what will actually occur.  

 

The Lord's vengeance is nigh upon us.  Yea, even within 20 years the children of men will see a great destruction fall upon them for their wickedness.  Yea, they will experience wars and famines and all manner of diseases and afflictions unless they repent and return unto the Lord.  As prophesied in days of past, the coming of His return is close at hand, yea even a time of separating the wheat from the tares.  Repent now and listen to the words of His humble servants or risk being swept up in the  destruction of the wicked.

 

I'll even be willing to bet my house it will come true.  Any takers?

[canard78]

Take a look again at the prophecy from President Woodruff, it makes no mention of a war.

A close reading the prophecy reveals that President Woodruff could have been referring to a number of events including a large famine, a series of natural disasters, an economic downturn, etc. If you do believe the prophecy is referring to WWI, did HF inspire Gavrilo Princip to assassinate Franz Ferdinand setting off a series of events that led to WWI? Had this same prophecy been given 20 years later we would have been discussing the prophet's ability to predict the great depression, twenty years after that the ability to predict WWII, twenty years after that his ability to predict the Cold War and the sexual revelation, twenty years after that his ability to predict the predict the global war on terror and the Great Recession.

In fact, I'll make a prophecy of my own and even be willing to make it more specific my mentioning what will actually occur.

The Lord's vengeance is nigh upon us. Yea, even within 20 years the children of men will see a great destruction fall upon them for their wickedness. Yea, they will experience wars and famines and all manner of diseases and afflictions unless they repent and return unto the Lord. As prophesied in days of past, the coming of His return is close at hand, yea even a time of separating the wheat from the tares. Repent now and listen to the words of His humble servants or risk being swept up in the destruction of the wicked.

I'll even be willing to bet my house it will come true. Any takers?

Very good point. It's so non-specific and the world is so constantly full of disaster, tragedy and strife that the generic nature of it could apply very broadly.

A prophesy of what someone will say in 600 years. Now that takes some doing. I'm not aware of any prophecy ever going that far.

[thesometimesaint]

To be fair it is really hard to recognize when you're living out a prophecy. Usually takes many years later for that realization.