Mystery Meat Posted June 17, 2015 Posted June 17, 2015 I agree that it's pretty clear. So the question is, why be purposely vague instead of just saying what Joseph and Rigdon did? The problem with the way Elder Packer phrased this that it allows for "plausible deniability" for those arguing that the he has not seen Jesus. In other words, he's making obscure what could be very clear. Seems incredibly counterproductive. Thus with ears to hear...
mfbukowski Posted June 17, 2015 Posted June 17, 2015 (edited) I am sure glad I joined the church before I knew about all these ....... odd..... urban legends that have no basis. I knew a person who saw Christ face to face, and she was not an apostle. I think that seeing Christ and being an apostle are independent variables which have nothing to do with each other Edited June 17, 2015 by mfbukowski 2
Damien the Leper Posted June 17, 2015 Posted June 17, 2015 (edited) Well Iscariot never saw the resurrected Jesus yet he was an apostle.Judas had a special calling. He knew what his actions entailed and still carried out the will of Christ. That is amazing faith in the face of fear. Edited June 17, 2015 by Valentinus
Stargazer Posted June 17, 2015 Posted June 17, 2015 I did. none suggest an apostle has seen Christ. you have to read that into it. What you appear to want is for an apostle to call a news conference to announce it. Even Christ instructed his Apostles to keep quiet about the Transfiguration until he had departed mortal life. As Elder Packard says, it is the Spirit that beareth record. If the Spirit does not bear record to you on this, then there we are.
Stargazer Posted June 17, 2015 Posted June 17, 2015 (edited) It's hard to get any more clear than that. Edit: I am sure there are some who would rather believe (or perhaps find it easier to believe, especially considering his status as the most recognizable villain in the Q 12 with some) that he is purposely being vague or deceitful. I am not one of those people. Elder Packer made clear in his conference talk in April 1971 that it was a very sacred subject, and the question itself, "Have you seen Him" was not one that even he felt free to ask his fellow brethren of the Twelve. Every single Apostle of the New Testament had seen the resurrected Lord, including Paul, who did so on the road to Damascus. Joseph Smith and others in the early church testified of it. Yet there are so many who just cannot believe, either because they do not have faith that the risen Lord can or will manifest himself to anyone, or because the modern man needs and wants it to be "in your face". Wasn't it Thomas who refused to believe the others had seen Him unless He showed up in his own face? That he couldn't bring himself to believe the report of the good news? John 12:37-40 37 ¶But though he had done so many miracles before them, yet they believed not on him: 38 That the saying of Esaias the prophet might be fulfilled, which he spake, Lord, who hath believed our report? and to whom hath the arm of the Lord been revealed? 39 Therefore they could not believe, because that Esaias said again, 40 He hath blinded their eyes, and hardened their heart; that they should not see with their eyes, nor understand with their heart, and be converted, and I should heal them. Yes, perhaps you believe that Jesus has risen, though you won't believe that the modern-day Apostles are like-privileged with the original Twelve. Unless they come right out and say it? The world wouldn't believe them. There would be little advantage to it, and might even be a detriment. But when such a one testifies that Jesus is the Christ, that He lives, cannot the Spirit testify that this is more than just an ordinary testimony? I understand the fear that if they don't come right out and say it, and yet many think that they are merely being respectful and attempting to not cast pearls before swine, and then it turns out that they never have seen the risen Lord, that many would lose faith -- those who had thought that they had seen Him. But how can one be a "special witness" if all they have is what I have? Sure, they have a special mission to preach Christ risen to all the world, but if they don't have a special experience, then they are just a quorum of Billy Grahams. And what about those many LDS who already strongly believe that the members of the Q12 have an actual special witness? They living in a dream world, right? If you cannot accept that "special witness" without an "in your face" declaration, then you are in the same boat with Thomas. Or so I feel. Edited June 17, 2015 by Stargazer 2
The Nehor Posted June 17, 2015 Posted June 17, 2015 Judas bad a special calling. He knew what his actions entailed and still Carrie out the will of Christ. That is amazing faith in the face of fear.Plus he got a nice financial windfall out of the thing and then faithfully killed himself.What is it about Iscariot that convinces people to become his apologist when everything we know of him says the complete opposite. 3
The Nehor Posted June 17, 2015 Posted June 17, 2015 soemthing to back your claims above would be nice. I am familiar with the two Book of Mormon references but not the rest.If you have not read the Bible and the Pearl of Great Price you may want to avoid this forum. You may inadvertently spoil your reading with spoilers. 1
Tacenda Posted June 17, 2015 Posted June 17, 2015 Maureen McCormick, aka Marsha Brady, claims to have seen Jesus. I read about it in a book she wrote, so I guess if she can, the apostles can.
Kaleb Webb Posted June 17, 2015 Posted June 17, 2015 The emphasis several apostles place on how it isn't necessary to have seen Christ to be an apostle would suggest that some of them haven't seen him. That doesn't mean all of them haven't, though.
sethpayne Posted June 17, 2015 Posted June 17, 2015 Thus with ears to hear... Not really. Anyone can read that sentence and interpret it either way. The spirit doesn't enter into it.
stemelbow Posted June 17, 2015 Posted June 17, 2015 What you appear to want is for an apostle to call a news conference to announce it. Even Christ instructed his Apostles to keep quiet about the Transfiguration until he had departed mortal life. As Elder Packard says, it is the Spirit that beareth record. If the Spirit does not bear record to you on this, then there we are. I don't want anything. This is the topic and so I'm commenting.
stemelbow Posted June 17, 2015 Posted June 17, 2015 Elder Packer made clear in his conference talk in April 1971 that it was a very sacred subject, and the question itself, "Have you seen Him" was not one that even he felt free to ask his fellow brethren of the Twelve. Every single Apostle of the New Testament had seen the resurrected Lord, including Paul, who did so on the road to Damascus. Joseph Smith and others in the early church testified of it. Yet there are so many who just cannot believe, either because they do not have faith that the risen Lord can or will manifest himself to anyone, or because the modern man needs and wants it to be "in your face". Wasn't it Thomas who refused to believe the others had seen Him unless He showed up in his own face? That he couldn't bring himself to believe the report of the good news? John 12:37-40 Yes, perhaps you believe that Jesus has risen, though you won't believe that the modern-day Apostles are like-privileged with the original Twelve. Unless they come right out and say it? The world wouldn't believe them. There would be little advantage to it, and might even be a detriment. But when such a one testifies that Jesus is the Christ, that He lives, cannot the Spirit testify that this is more than just an ordinary testimony? I understand the fear that if they don't come right out and say it, and yet many think that they are merely being respectful and attempting to not cast pearls before swine, and then it turns out that they never have seen the risen Lord, that many would lose faith -- those who had thought that they had seen Him. But how can one be a "special witness" if all they have is what I have? Sure, they have a special mission to preach Christ risen to all the world, but if they don't have a special experience, then they are just a quorum of Billy Grahams. And what about those many LDS who already strongly believe that the members of the Q12 have an actual special witness? They living in a dream world, right? If you cannot accept that "special witness" without an "in your face" declaration, then you are in the same boat with Thomas. Or so I feel. To be clear, I'm quite comfortable to have people believe our current twelve have had personal visits with the Savior. I'm just saying, none have suggested they have so there's really no need to speculate. Unless they tell us, I'm happy enough thinking they have not. They may not need such a visit. I'm happy enough with who they are and I don't think any of them would have an encounter and keep it secret unless asked not to. I don't really get into the pearls before swine idea because they are to be witnesses of Christ in some sense. If they had visited with Him personally then as witnesses it'd seem likely they'd say so and not be so afraid. 1
HappyJackWagon Posted June 17, 2015 Posted June 17, 2015 What you appear to want is for an apostle to call a news conference to announce it. Even Christ instructed his Apostles to keep quiet about the Transfiguration until he had departed mortal life. As Elder Packard says, it is the Spirit that beareth record. If the Spirit does not bear record to you on this, then there we are.Press conference? That's not really necessary. But how about an Ensign article, a sentence in one of the Teachings of the Prophets books, or...I'm just spitballing here, but how about General Conference where they witness to the world of Christ. None of those things seem unreasonable. But again, everone can choose to believe what they want and I choose not to stake my beliefs on something the apostles/prophets don't even claim for themselves.
Senator Posted June 17, 2015 Posted June 17, 2015 I'll admit that I hold a different connection to the "witness of the resurrection" of the original eleven, of Paul, of Joseph Smith, than I do of the contemporary Apostles. I guess I'm failing to understand why making public one's "witness" (speaking of a witness like that of the original eleven) of the Lord's resurrection is forbidden now. 2
Senator Posted June 17, 2015 Posted June 17, 2015 (edited) I believe many of the current apostles have seen Christ in person. Among them, I believe President Monson, President Eyring, President Packer, and Elder Hales have seen Him. This is from comments they have made over the years. Here is one from President Packer from April 2014 conference: "After all the years that I have lived and taught and served, after the millions of miles I have traveled around the world, with all that I have experienced, there is one great truth that I would share. That is my witness of the Savior Jesus Christ.Joseph Smith and Sidney Rigdon recorded the following after a sacred experience:“And now, after the many testimonies which have been given of him, this is the testimony, last of all, which we give of him: That he lives!“For we saw him” (D&C 76:22–23).Their words are my words.I believe and I am sure that Jesus is the Christ, the Son of God, and that He lives." I wonder why it has become verboten for contemporary witnesses to not make known their personal experiences. Why was it ok for the world to know about Joseph and Sidney's witness, but not the current possessors of such witness? Edited June 17, 2015 by Senator
Gray Posted June 17, 2015 Posted June 17, 2015 If you cannot accept that "special witness" without an "in your face" declaration, then you are in the same boat with Thomas. Or so I feel. Well, Thomas got a clear declaration, but wanted to see for himself. That's a step removed from getting an insinuation, but wanting a clear declaration.
SeekingUnderstanding Posted June 17, 2015 Posted June 17, 2015 It's hard to get any more clear than that. Actually it is very very easy. Try "I have personally seen the Lord." 1
Duncan Posted June 17, 2015 Posted June 17, 2015 Anybody remember this video from 15 years ago? https://www.lds.org/prophets-and-apostles/what-are-prophets-testimonies?lang=eng
Mystery Meat Posted June 17, 2015 Posted June 17, 2015 To be clear, I'm quite comfortable to have people believe our current twelve have had personal visits with the Savior. I'm just saying, none have suggested they have so there's really no need to speculate. Unless they tell us, I'm happy enough thinking they have not. They may not need such a visit. I'm happy enough with who they are and I don't think any of them would have an encounter and keep it secret unless asked not to. I don't really get into the pearls before swine idea because they are to be witnesses of Christ in some sense. If they had visited with Him personally then as witnesses it'd seem likely they'd say so and not be so afraid. President Packer made it pretty clear...
sethpayne Posted June 17, 2015 Posted June 17, 2015 President Packer made it pretty clear... Then why was he purposely vague? Joseph and Rigdon were clear. President Packer was vague. Why? 2
stemelbow Posted June 17, 2015 Posted June 17, 2015 President Packer made it pretty clear... I'm confused what you think he made clear? Did he say that he has personally seen Christ? He said he has been commanded to not share about the special interviews that some have had. That is not clearly saying he's seen Christ, visited with Him. I realize people can read into that and hope he means He's visited with and seen Christ. But he did not clearly say as much. If the current 12 have not seen Christ and yet are special witnesses in some sense, then what Packer said is not claiming to have seen Christ.
HappyJackWagon Posted June 17, 2015 Posted June 17, 2015 The modern apostles and prophets are purposefully cagy about whether or not they've see Christ because they're trying to appeal to everyone. They want to appeal to the member who believe they must have seen Christ, so even if they haven't, they insinuate that maybe they have but they couldn't possibly speak of it. Thus those who want to believe can. They also want to appeal to those who are less likely to believe they've physically seen Christ so they speak with vague language that can easily be explained away. Thus those who don't believe they've seen Christ are not turned off to the church. They want it both ways. This seems pretty clear to me. 2
sethpayne Posted June 17, 2015 Posted June 17, 2015 I'm confused what you think he made clear? Did he say that he has personally seen Christ?He said he has been commanded to not share about the special interviews that some have had. That is not clearly saying he's seen Christ, visited with Him. I realize people can read into that and hope he means He's visited with and seen Christ. But he did not clearly say as much.If the current 12 have not seen Christ and yet are special witnesses in some sense, then what Packer said is not claiming to have seen Christ. Yep. If you are a witness of the resurrection, then say so. If not, then say so. It's a little nuts to let the membership guess about something so important. 1
Storm Rider Posted June 17, 2015 Posted June 17, 2015 Yep. If you are a witness of the resurrection, then say so. If not, then say so. It's a little nuts to let the membership guess about something so important. I don't think there is an ambiguity that Jesus is the Christ, the Son of God; that he is our Savior; following him is our only path to return to our Father. Is there something more important than that? 2
Duncan Posted June 17, 2015 Posted June 17, 2015 The modern apostles and prophets are purposefully cagy about whether or not they've see Christ because they're trying to appeal to everyone. They want to appeal to the member who believe they must have seen Christ, so even if they haven't, they insinuate that maybe they have but they couldn't possibly speak of it. Thus those who want to believe can. They also want to appeal to those who are less likely to believe they've physically seen Christ so they speak with vague language that can easily be explained away. Thus those who don't believe they've seen Christ are not turned off to the church. They want it both ways. This seems pretty clear to me. what do you think about Elder Haight telling of his experience with Christ in GC? or Pres. Hugh B. Brown's experience at the Washington DC Temple dedication or this from Pres. Benson “Nothing will surprise us more than when we get to heaven and see the Father and realize how well we know Him and how familiar His face is to us.” I don't think he's lying to us! He's from Idaho!
Recommended Posts