Sevenbak Posted September 30, 2015 Posted September 30, 2015 Sorry. I don't buy this to sacred to talk about claim. I think that keeps it intentionally vague as well. JS was not vague in what he claimed nor were the ancient apostles.Yeah, and look what happened to Joseph. I think the need to seal testimonies with blood are over, at least for now.Others HAVE talked about it, but they are careful as to which audiences it goes. Different times now, we have the testimony and teachings, and we know it happened. We still herald it as truth, but why rub it in the face of the world and seek more opposition? Is there really anything more to be gained by it? Flip the coin for a second... If I hear that John Brown from Louisiana, who was a leader of his church keeps telling people he saw Jesus and he told him this or that, how would most react? Mormons already make that claim, and Angels even brought a book, a new scripture! Let it go.
The Nehor Posted September 30, 2015 Posted September 30, 2015 Sorry. I don't buy this to sacred to talk about claim. I think that keeps it intentionally vague as well. JS was not vague in what he claimed nor were the ancient apostles. Actually Joseph Smith kept the First Vision close to his chest for some time. He did tell some friends but later people confused it and the angel Moroni visit. Joseph Smith admits in the account we use in scripture that he wrote it because he had to clean up the mess of third and fourth-hand accounts of it being passed around.
JAHS Posted September 30, 2015 Author Posted September 30, 2015 Sorry. I don't buy this to sacred to talk about claim. I think that keeps it intentionally vague as well. JS was not vague in what he claimed nor were the ancient apostles.Most of the ancient Apostles knew him in person. When Stephen saw Jesus people threw stones at him and ran over him with a Honda car. "Then they cried out with a loud voice, and stopped their ears, and ran upon him with one accord," (Acts 7: 55-60) ;-) Joseph Smith was also killed. If a person were to now come out and bluntly proclaim that he has seen Jesus people would think he was crazy and bring a lot of mockery against him and the church; more than there is now. Such a thing would not advance the gospel of Jesus in these times.
CMZ Posted September 30, 2015 Posted September 30, 2015 If anyone can have such a witness by following the prescribed conditions, is that too, apostolic? Or is it just a witness? Is there a difference for one who is a member of the 12 as oppose to one of us? It's the same as an apostolic witness but it doesn't mean that having it will make you an apostle.
CMZ Posted September 30, 2015 Posted September 30, 2015 No. In fact it could be just the opposite. If someone should see a vission or be visited by someone from the other side (eg Jesus) there's the possibility that they might think they were hallucinating or something. However the witness from the Holy Ghost is probably the more sure witness for anything spiritual. That can not be misunderstood or misinterpreted. Just like Laman and Lemuel seeing an angel but with no accompanying witness of the Holy Ghost to them that they allowed themselves to feel. So, the physical manifestation didn't end up meaning much to them.
CMZ Posted September 30, 2015 Posted September 30, 2015 Sorry. I don't buy this to sacred to talk about claim. I think that keeps it intentionally vague as well. JS was not vague in what he claimed nor were the ancient apostles. Actually, Joseph Smith's experience was intentionally designed to be the premiere such experience for this dispensation. Anybody else's witness in this dispensation is meant to echo and support his. Other people seeing Christ in this dispensation is meant primarily for themselves and they can share with certain people as the Spirit directs or withhold as the Spirit directs (I've seen recent examples of each). Each individual person can receive a witness that Joseph Smith's testimony is true. I spoke briefly with a member of the Seventy one time after a stake conference and with a Regional Representative after a different stake conference and learned some interesting things.
Tacenda Posted September 30, 2015 Posted September 30, 2015 Could it be possible that people like JS want to help belief in the Saviour? And someone saying they are an apostolic witness help those believe also?
CMZ Posted September 30, 2015 Posted September 30, 2015 Could it be possible that people like JS want to help belief in the Saviour? And someone saying they are an apostolic witness help those believe also? Yes.
ERayR Posted September 30, 2015 Posted September 30, 2015 If anyone can have such a witness by following the prescribed conditions, is that too, apostolic? Or is it just a witness? Is there a difference for one who is a member of the 12 as oppose to one of us?One is called as an apostle the rest of us are not.
JAHS Posted September 30, 2015 Author Posted September 30, 2015 If anyone can have such a witness by following the prescribed conditions, is that too, apostolic? Or is it just a witness? Is there a difference for one who is a member of the 12 as oppose to one of us? President Joseph Fielding Smith.said:"All men may, by virtue of the priesthood and the gift of the Holy Ghost, become witnesses for Christ, In fact that is just what every elder in the Church should be, but there is a special calling which is given to the Twelve special witnesses that separates them from other elders of the Church in the nature of their calling as witnesses. These twelve men hold the fulness of authority, keys, and priesthood, to open up the way for the preaching of the gospel to every nation, kindred, and tongue." (DS 3:146.) That's what makes them "special". For the rest of us we are witnesses who, according to God's will, might have the opportunity to be visited by the Savior. But such an experience would only be for our own personal edification.
TheSkepticChristian Posted September 30, 2015 Posted September 30, 2015 Members quite often wonder if any of the General authorities have had a visitation of the Savior. I have always assumed that most of them have not, but a few might have. The way he said the above seemed to be sending a message that perhaps Elder Scott had such a personal witness; not just a confirmtion from the Holy Ghost. Maybe I am reading too much into it. There is no account that claims a General Authority saw Jesus, at least no account since Lorenzo Snow. If some General Authorities see Jesus, it means they never share the experience, which also means that Elder Scott's son doesn't know. There is also no need for General Authorities to see Jesus. Right?
CMZ Posted September 30, 2015 Posted September 30, 2015 If some General Authorities see Jesus, it means they never share the experience, which also means that Elder Scott's son doesn't know. No, actually it doesn't mean they don't share the experience. As stated earlier some may be prompted to share the experience with certain people (be it family members, small groups of Church members...), while others may be prompted to not share it. But whatever they are commanded by the Spirit to do in regards to personal visitations from the Savior the apostles are still to share their witness from the Holy Ghost that they know of the truthfulness of Christ's resurrection.
JAHS Posted September 30, 2015 Author Posted September 30, 2015 There is no account that claims a General Authority saw Jesus, at least no account since Lorenzo Snow. If some General Authorities see Jesus, it means they never share the experience, which also means that Elder Scott's son doesn't know. There is also no need for General Authorities to see Jesus. Right? In Lorenzo Snow's case it was a personal story that he told to his granddaughter as CMZ explained. But you are right that there is no "need" for them to see Jesus, but it can be a part of their experience as a special witness.
TheSkepticChristian Posted September 30, 2015 Posted September 30, 2015 (edited) In Lorenzo Snow's case it was a personal story that he told to his granddaughter as CMZ explained. But you are right that there is no "need" for them to see Jesus, but it can be a part of their experience as a special witness. Are there personal stories about that after Lorenzo Snow? Again, if current General Authorities see Jesus, it means they are not sharing because nobody knows, or at least nobody is making public statements about that. Edited September 30, 2015 by TheSkepticChristian
JAHS Posted September 30, 2015 Author Posted September 30, 2015 Are there personal stories about that after Lorenzo Snow? Again, if current General Authorities see Jesus, it means they are not sharing because nobody knows, or at least nobody is making public statements about that. That's right and I don't suppose any of them ever will except maybe to their family or close trusted friends. In our day such a public statement might be cherishd by the members but brutally ridiculed and mocked by the larger general public which would not be good for the missionary work.
stemelbow Posted September 30, 2015 Posted September 30, 2015 That's right and I don't suppose any of them ever will except maybe to their family or close trusted friends. In our day such a public statement might be cherishd by the members but brutally ridiculed and mocked by the larger general public which would not be good for the missionary work. That doesn't really make sense, though. If they have truly seen Christ and they told us all about it, it'd bring that many people within their earshot. Why? Because so many would be more and more curious about this group of men who claim to have visits from Christ. Now we get vague allusions every once in a while from one of them, teasing the membership who get all excited because they were part of a special meeting wherein Elder so and so vaguely suggest a visit might have happened, if you take his words a certain way. It all just looks silly, as it currently is. If they've seen Him, we'd all be way better off if they just told us, explicitly. I grant it's possible they have seen Him and God would prefer they not tell us for His own purposes, but we dont' know what those purposes would be anyway. So, I say, what's the point in wondering if they have seen Him? They won't say, explicitly, and we're just playing games when we try to bend their words into suggesting they have seen Him. It feels like I'm getting messed with when I hear of these certain incidences, even Pres Packer's statement of "their words are my words" or whatever.
JAHS Posted September 30, 2015 Author Posted September 30, 2015 (edited) That doesn't really make sense, though. If they have truly seen Christ and they told us all about it, it'd bring that many people within their earshot. Why? Because so many would be more and more curious about this group of men who claim to have visits from Christ. Now we get vague allusions every once in a while from one of them, teasing the membership who get all excited because they were part of a special meeting wherein Elder so and so vaguely suggest a visit might have happened, if you take his words a certain way. It all just looks silly, as it currently is.If they've seen Him, we'd all be way better off if they just told us, explicitly. I grant it's possible they have seen Him and God would prefer they not tell us for His own purposes, but we dont' know what those purposes would be anyway. So, I say, what's the point in wondering if they have seen Him? They won't say, explicitly, and we're just playing games when we try to bend their words into suggesting they have seen Him. It feels like I'm getting messed with when I hear of these certain incidences, even Pres Packer's statement of "their words are my words" or whatever. It keeps us living by faith, which is how it was meant to be. I don't feel like I am being "messed with". My testimony is strong enough that I don't need them to be explicit about it. And I stand by my original statement; the church and it's leaders would be mocked. Edited September 30, 2015 by JAHS
stemelbow Posted September 30, 2015 Posted September 30, 2015 It keeps us living by faith, which is how it was meant to be. I don't feel like I am being "messed with". My testimony is strong enough that I don't need them to be explicit about it. And I stand by my original statement; the church and it's leaders would be mocked. They already are mocked. You are suggesting they'd be mocked more broadly. Of course, because if they were explicit about it, someone outside of the ex-LDS and an occasional media mockery, will have listened to them. As of now, we're just too uninfluential to get much attention besides a few mentions in comic routines and one broadway show. Why fear mockery? They're supposed to take it with joy. Not sure that works very well as an explanation. And if they claimed to have seen Christ it's still a matter of faith for us. We would still be living by faith. I think, when it comes down to it, they haven't seen Him. And if they have and aren't supposed to tell us, we don't know God's mind here. We're really just guessing. Which is interesting because we are just playing with their words that hint at seeing Christ to begin with.
JAHS Posted September 30, 2015 Author Posted September 30, 2015 They already are mocked. You are suggesting they'd be mocked more broadly. Of course, because if they were explicit about it, someone outside of the ex-LDS and an occasional media mockery, will have listened to them. As of now, we're just too uninfluential to get much attention besides a few mentions in comic routines and one broadway show.Why fear mockery? They're supposed to take it with joy. Not sure that works very well as an explanation. And if they claimed to have seen Christ it's still a matter of faith for us. We would still be living by faith. I think, when it comes down to it, they haven't seen Him. And if they have and aren't supposed to tell us, we don't know God's mind here. We're really just guessing. Which is interesting because we are just playing with their words that hint at seeing Christ to begin with.If the FIrst Presidency came out with a statement tomorrow that the three of them together were visited by the resurrected Jesus Christ, I and many others would believe them and there would be less need to live by faith. Not sure why you think they should take mockery with joy. They should of course endure it, keep smiling and go forward in faith, but almost the entire world would write them off as nut-jobs; the same way I did when I heard about the Heaven's Gate cult that believed they would be taken up in a spaceship hiding behind a comet if they committed suicide. I have no idea if or how many have really seen Christ, but even if they only hint at it, I don't really have a problem with that and do not base my testimony on it. 1
Dgal Posted October 1, 2015 Posted October 1, 2015 That doesn't really make sense, though. If they have truly seen Christ and they told us all about it, it'd bring that many people within their earshot. Why? Because so many would be more and more curious about this group of men who claim to have visits from Christ. Now we get vague allusions every once in a while from one of them, teasing the membership who get all excited because they were part of a special meeting wherein Elder so and so vaguely suggest a visit might have happened, if you take his words a certain way. It all just looks silly, as it currently is.If they've seen Him, we'd all be way better off if they just told us, explicitly. I grant it's possible they have seen Him and God would prefer they not tell us for His own purposes, but we dont' know what those purposes would be anyway. So, I say, what's the point in wondering if they have seen Him? They won't say, explicitly, and we're just playing games when we try to bend their words into suggesting they have seen Him. It feels like I'm getting messed with when I hear of these certain incidences, even Pres Packer's statement of "their words are my wo I agree with this, because it's exactly what the Original 12 did. To the point that they even died. I don't understand why they don't act and witness to Christ's resurrection in the same way the the Apostles of old did. They do it the opposite. I have never understood that.
Calm Posted October 1, 2015 Posted October 1, 2015 Scriptures point to people coming to see Jesus because of the miracles or to be fed, but not sticking around afterwards.Perhaps conversion is more likely to penetrate to the heart when it is not based on being attracted by such dramatic claims as seeing Christ in the here and now...so one is more focused on what is happening and meaningful internally than what is going on externally.
Storm Rider Posted October 1, 2015 Posted October 1, 2015 I agree with this, because it's exactly what the Original 12 did. To the point that they even died. I don't understand why they don't act and witness to Christ's resurrection in the same way the the Apostles of old did. They do it the opposite. I have never understood that. No, that is actually not what the original 12 did. As you read the Bible what did the 12 do - call people to repentance and baptize. They bore witness to the resurrected Savior, but no more than what the current apostles do. I don't understand what you mean when you say, "They do it the opposite"? What does that mean and how do the latter-day apostles do it the opposite?
CMZ Posted October 1, 2015 Posted October 1, 2015 If a current apostle came right and said, "I have seen Christ," then any listener would have the same need to receive their own confirmation as to the truthfulness of that statement, and that same spirit that could witness to that truth can also witness to the truth of the First Vision. More importantly it can witness to the truthfulness of The Book of Mormon, which is the main thing given to us in this dispensation on which our testimonies should rest. 1
Dgal Posted October 1, 2015 Posted October 1, 2015 No, that is actually not what the original 12 did. As you read the Bible what did the 12 do - call people to repentance and baptize. They bore witness to the resurrected Savior, but no more than what the current apostles do. I don't understand what you mean when you say, "They do it the opposite"? What does that mean and how do the latter-day apostles do it the opposite? The Original 12 (well 11 at this point) testified of Christ and of His resurrection. And all were martyed, with the exception of John. They were very bold about testifying of Christ. Even Paul, who also was beheaded. I don't understand why the 12 today aren't just as bold in proclaiming they have seen Christ resurrected in all of His glory. Makes no sense to me, given the Original 11 who did
Recommended Posts