DBMormon Posted June 15, 2015 Posted June 15, 2015 (edited) Seems like they want to keep it open that they haven't as a group or as individuals across the board. Elder Oaks in the Boise Rescue audio said the following He quotes D&C 107:23 - "The twelve traveling councilors are called to be the Twelve Apostles, or special witnesses of the name of Christ in all the world" and then says "This is not to witness of a personal manifestation. To witness of the name is to witness of the plan, the work, or mission such as the atonement and the authority or priesthood of the Lord Jesus Christ, which an apostle who holds the keys is uniquely responsible to do. Of course apostles are also witnesses of Christ just like all members of the church who have the gift of the Holy Ghost." Edited June 15, 2015 by DBMormon 1
bluebell Posted June 15, 2015 Posted June 15, 2015 I don't see this as Oaks saying that none of them have seen Christ. Only that one does not have to have seen Christ to be an apostle. 4
stemelbow Posted June 15, 2015 Posted June 15, 2015 Seems like they want to keep it open that they haven't Elder Oaks in the Boise Rescue audio said the following He quotes D&C 107:23 - "The twelve traveling councilors are called to be the Twelve Apostles, or special witnesses of the name of Christ in all the world" and then says I think it comes down to, at least concerning how they talk about it, some might have seen Him, but most of us haven't.
Storm Rider Posted June 15, 2015 Posted June 15, 2015 It would make sense that a personal visitation with the Savior is not a common event...even in the lives of the Apostles. However, it is folly to assume that due to un-commonality that no apostle has seen the Savior. Some have seen him and others have not.
The Nehor Posted June 15, 2015 Posted June 15, 2015 I don't see this as Oaks saying that none of them have seen Christ. Only that one does not have to have seen Christ to be an apostle.Actually he only said they do not have to witness of such a visitation which they generally do not. Not proof that they have such a visitation but not saying they do not either. 1
DBMormon Posted June 15, 2015 Author Posted June 15, 2015 (edited) It would make sense that a personal visitation with the Savior is not a common event...even in the lives of the Apostles. However, it is folly to assume that due to un-commonality that no apostle has seen the Savior. Some have seen him and others have not. I have edited it to mean that as a rule of thumb they each have seen him. I think most members would be surprised to know that they each don't see Christ as a requirement for the calling. Edited June 15, 2015 by DBMormon
bluebell Posted June 15, 2015 Posted June 15, 2015 Actually he only said they do not have to witness of such a visitation which they generally do not. Not proof that they have such a visitation but not saying they do not either. That's what i thought i said....
The Nehor Posted June 15, 2015 Posted June 15, 2015 That's what i thought i said....Similar but not quite the same.I have edited it to mean that as a rule of thumb they each have seen him. I think most members would be surprised to know that they each don't see Christ as a requirement for the calling.It is possible there is another way to receive an apostolic witness. I would not be surprised if that were the case.
bluebell Posted June 15, 2015 Posted June 15, 2015 I have edited it to mean that as a rule of thumb they each have seen him. I think most members would be surprised to know that they each don't see Christ as a requirement for the calling. Maybe that's true, but that was not what we believed in my ward growing up among the youth, and i've never personally met a member that believed that, though of course i have not had this discussion with many members either. 2
bluebell Posted June 15, 2015 Posted June 15, 2015 (edited) Similar but not quite the same. What is the difference? Ah, never mind, i see what you are saying. Edited June 15, 2015 by bluebell
The Nehor Posted June 15, 2015 Posted June 15, 2015 What is the difference?You said they do not have to see Christ to be an apostle based on that information and I said they do not have to witness of seeing Christ to be an apostle.
stemelbow Posted June 15, 2015 Posted June 15, 2015 I have edited it to mean that as a rule of thumb they each have seen him. I think most members would be surprised to know that they each don't see Christ as a requirement for the calling. Members would go crazy if there was any indication of a visitation from Christ to any one of them. 1
Kevin Christensen Posted June 15, 2015 Posted June 15, 2015 See Gregory Smith, "Passing up the Heavenly Gift," part 1, and notice the relevant accounts therein. http://www.mormoninterpreter.com/passing-up-the-heavenly-gift-part-one-of-two/ FWIW Kevin Christensen Canonsburg, PA 2
DBMormon Posted June 15, 2015 Author Posted June 15, 2015 Members would go crazy if there was any indication of a visitation from Christ to any one of them.that sounds like deflection but ok
DBMormon Posted June 15, 2015 Author Posted June 15, 2015 See Gregory Smith, "Passing up the Heavenly Gift," part 1, and notice the relevant accounts therein.http://www.mormoninterpreter.com/passing-up-the-heavenly-gift-part-one-of-two/FWIWKevin ChristensenCanonsburg, PAsome accounts doesn't change my point. some may have but the brethren are not special witnesses in the definition that has them seeing Christ as part of their calling.
stemelbow Posted June 15, 2015 Posted June 15, 2015 that sounds like deflection but okI'm not meaning to deflect. Just pointing out any indication an Apostle might give that could possibly be interpreted or twisted to suggest he has had a personal visit from Christ would illicit and has illicited excitement from the general population. That suggests the members are pretty good at assuming a visit has happened and just want someone to say so.
DBMormon Posted June 15, 2015 Author Posted June 15, 2015 I'm not meaning to deflect. Just pointing out any indication an Apostle might give that could possibly be interpreted or twisted to suggest he has had a personal visit from Christ would illicit and has illicited excitement from the general population. That suggests the members are pretty good at assuming a visit has happened and just want someone to say so.Even if they all said we have not seen them, some here would say "they have to say that, they are holding back sacred things" I'd rather deal with what is said rather than what a good defense might look like if we postulate. 1
The Nehor Posted June 15, 2015 Posted June 15, 2015 Members would go crazy if there was any indication of a visitation from Christ to any one of them.Really? I did not go crazy when an apostle described the process of sanctification to receive such a witness and told us it was glorious. Should I have? 1
The Nehor Posted June 15, 2015 Posted June 15, 2015 some accounts doesn't change my point. some may have but the brethren are not special witnesses in the definition that has them seeing Christ as part of their calling.I strongly suspect you are wrong. 1
stemelbow Posted June 15, 2015 Posted June 15, 2015 Really? I did not go crazy when an apostle described the process of sanctification to receive such a witness and told us it was glorious. Should I have? That's the problem with crazy--often times when you go crazy you don't know you've gone that route. other than that, I don't know what you're talking about. Have any current apostles suggested they've seen Christ?
stemelbow Posted June 15, 2015 Posted June 15, 2015 Even if they all said we have not seen them, some here would say "they have to say that, they are holding back sacred things" I'd rather deal with what is said rather than what a good defense might look like if we postulate. I agree with ya, here. I'm not trying to make any sort of defense, though. Not sure what I've been communicating. 1
The Nehor Posted June 15, 2015 Posted June 15, 2015 That's the problem with crazy--often times when you go crazy you don't know you've gone that route.other than that, I don't know what you're talking about. Have any current apostles suggested they've seen Christ?If this is madness then sign me up for the straight jacket.I have heard two apostles suggest it in my lifetime. Both times were in smaller meetings. I get the impression that they are forbidden to outright say it for some reason. 1
Mystery Meat Posted June 15, 2015 Posted June 15, 2015 (edited) There are examples in scripture where prophets were required to hold things back from the masses. I don't see why that couldn't be going on today. I can't say that it is, but you can't say that it isn't. There is no more evidence to support one over the other. Edited June 15, 2015 by Mystery Meat
Recommended Posts