Do you think there has been a revelation from God since Joseph Smith's time?

[JLHPROF]

5 hours ago, california boy said:

What revelations from God do you think the prophets have received directly from Him since the time of Joseph Smith?  Do you think that heavenly messengers and even Christ Himself has visited the prophet?  Can any statement by any prophet since Joseph Smith's time start with "Thus sayth the Lord?

I am not talking about feelings of the Spirit that we can all have.  Or perhaps feelings of the Spirit that the prophet has concerning the church.  I am talking about communicating as Abraham of old "face to face as one man speaks to another".   Or is that kind of revelation a thing of the past??  Is the Holy Ghost the only communicator of God's will in the church today?

 

1 hour ago, TheSkepticChristian said:

I know, but it does make you wonder

Quote

Being a prophet or apostle does not require that one actually see Jesus, in vision or in person, although some of them claim to have done so.

after Joseph Smith? For example? CFR 

Brigham Young - D&C 136, vision of the SL Temple, vision of Joseph Smith concerning the Law of Adoption and many more visions and revelations
John Taylor - multiple revelations in 1882,1883,1884,1886 and numerous other Thus Saith The Lord revelations.
Wilford Woodruff - 1880, 1889 and numerous other Thus Saith The Lord revelations.
Lorenzo Snow - SL Temple meeting the Savior, revelation on tithing
Joseph F. Smith - D&C 138

 

[Guest]

2 hours ago, The Nehor said:

I got one yesterday.

You said you would stop that...no wait, someone told you to fess up...no wait, oh never mind.

[TheSkepticChristian]

3 hours ago, Robert F. Smith said:

If so, they haven't confided that to me.  Of course, as pointed out by Mark Bukowski, they would be unlikely to do so.

Why? I thought God was the same yesterday, today, and forever. According to the Book of Mormon and the Bible many prophets testified of seeing God, Jesus, and angels. Why are our modern prophets different? 

[JLHPROF]

8 minutes ago, TheSkepticChristian said:

Why? I thought God was the same yesterday, today, and forever. According to the Book of Mormon and the Bible many prophets testified of seeing God, Jesus, and angels. Why are our modern prophets different? 

D&C 130:20 There is a law, irrevocably decreed in heaven before the foundations of this world, upon which all blessings are predicated—
21 And when we obtain any blessing from God, it is by obedience to that law upon which it is predicated.

[JAHS]

4 hours ago, TheSkepticChristian said:

So any 20th or 21st century prophet or apostle that claimed to see Jesus? 

Even if they did I don't think they would share such a sacred experience it with the world. Can you imagine the reaction they would get from church critics and even people who are not church critics? 

[Avatar4321]

I have to marvel at those who say they are knowledgeable about the church and don't know about any revelation after Joseph died. I mean you have to complete ignore scriptures after that. You have to ignore the countless accounts of visitations from Christ etc. I just don't get it

[Robert F. Smith]

1 hour ago, TheSkepticChristian said:

Why? I thought God was the same yesterday, today, and forever. According to the Book of Mormon and the Bible many prophets testified of seeing God, Jesus, and angels. Why are our modern prophets different? 

Well, if you think so, then make a list of them.  Did Nathan see God?  How about Samuel, or any other biblical prophets?  There might be a very short list, but you need to sit down and verify your sudden claim that "many" saw God/Jesus.  Angels more often, because an angel is a messenger of God (that is what the word "angel" means).  Same for the BofM:  Make a list.  Did the majority of BofM prophets see God?  You may be operating on a completely false assumption here.

[Avatar4321]

1 hour ago, JAHS said:

Even if they did I don't think they would share such a sacred experience it with the world. Can you imagine the reaction they would get from church critics and even people who are not church critics? 

Some of them have shared such an experience

[california boy]

7 hours ago, mfbukowski said:

If I tell you I know someone who saw Christ you will say "How do you know he is not lying"?

So why do you think Joseph was not lying?

Either you believe or you don't.  No evidence to satisfy curious onlookers is possible

I am just asking the question because I am interested in what members of the church think.  Sorry if you feel I have some kind of agenda on this issue.  I don't.  

[TheSkepticChristian]

1 hour ago, Robert F. Smith said:

  Did the majority of BofM prophets see God?  

I never said that, I said, "many prophets testified of seeing God, Jesus, and angels"  

1 hour ago, Robert F. Smith said:

 Angels more often, because an angel is a messenger of God 

more often? So please name a General Authority (except Joseph Smith and the BofM witnesses) that claimed to see an angel (spirit or resurrected) in person. 

 

Edited June 27, 2016 by TheSkepticChristian

[Robert F. Smith]

37 minutes ago, TheSkepticChristian said:

I never said that, I said, "many prophets testified of seeing God, Jesus, and angels"  

more often? So please name a General Authority (except Joseph Smith and the BofM witnesses) that claimed to see an angel (spirit or resurrected) in person. 

You need to reread our discussion so far:  I am referring to all prophets and all instances in Holy Writ.  You are being atomistic and narrow.  That's why it doesn't make any sense to you.  Do your basic research first, then study the results.

[california boy]

2 hours ago, JAHS said:

Even if they did I don't think they would share such a sacred experience it with the world. Can you imagine the reaction they would get from church critics and even people who are not church critics? 

Who cares what the church critics think or say. Can you imagine the increase in faith and trust from the members if such an event happened??

[TheSkepticChristian]

52 minutes ago, Robert F. Smith said:

You need to reread our discussion so far:  I am referring to all prophets and all instances in Holy Writ.  .

and I am referring to many prophets that saw God, Jesus, or angels according to Holy Writ. I never said "all" or "most" 

By "many" I don't mean a long list because we don't know all the Prophets equivalent to President Monson in Holy Write. However, the few that we know (like Moses, Abraham, Lehi)many of them did see God or angels according to Holy Writ. 

52 minutes ago, Robert F. Smith said:

  Do your basic research first, then study the results.

Okay, how about apostles in the New Testament? 

1. Paul saw Jesus.

2. John saw Jesus and angels.

3. Jesus saw the Father and angels. 

4.  Two angels appear to the disciples of Jesus 

5. An angel frees one apostle from prison 

Quote

There might be a very short list

because we don't know many New Testament apostles, we know more than 100 LDS apostles. 

Edited June 27, 2016 by TheSkepticChristian

[Bernard Gui]

We believe that a man must be called of God by revelation....

 

[Bernard Gui]

Every foundation stone that is laid for a temple, and every temple completed according to the order the Lord has revealed for his Holy Priesthood, lessens the power of Satan on earth, and increases the power of God and godliness, moves the heavens in mighty power in our behalf, invokes and calls down upon us the blessings of Eternal Gods, and those who reside in their presence.

Elder George Q. Cannon of the Council of the Twelve stated this truth at the laying of the cornerstones of the Logan Temple, September 17, 1877.

[Hamba Tuhan]

On 27/06/2016 at 4:35 AM, california boy said:

Or is that kind of revelation a thing of the past??  Is the Holy Ghost the only communicator of God's will in the church today?

If God uses all kinds of revelatory methods amongst the Saints at large, why on earth would one conclude that the authorised prophets are in receipt of any less revelation?

Edited June 30, 2016 by Hamba Tuhan

[Kenngo1969]

14 hours ago, TheSkepticChristian said:

So any 20th or 21st century prophet or apostle that claimed to see Jesus? 

 

9 hours ago, JAHS said:

Even if they did I don't think they would share such a sacred experience it with the world. Can you imagine the reaction they would get from church critics and even people who are not church critics? 

 

6 hours ago, california boy said:

Who cares what the church critics think or say. Can you imagine the increase in faith and trust from the members if such an event happened??

You misunderstand the nature and purpose of faith if you think that such an event and its recounting by its recipient would increase faith.  (See Alma 32, John 10:24-27.)  President Nelson was unequivocal about the nature of the policy change regarding the eligibility for baptism of minors reared in non-heterosexual households, but that certainly didn't result in an "increase in faith and trust from [many of] the members."  

[JAHS]

14 hours ago, TheSkepticChristian said:

So any 20th or 21st century prophet or apostle that claimed to see Jesus? 

Even if they did I don't think they would share such a sacred experience it with the world. Can you imagine the reaction they would get from church critics and even people who are not church critics? 

8 hours ago, Avatar4321 said:

Some of them have shared such an experience

I don't know of any who have come out and clearly stated that Jesus has appeared to them in person. Some have hinted at some sort of special witness they have received of Him, but no obvious face to face meeting. Which Apostles are you referring to?

[stemelbow]

21 minutes ago, Kenngo1969 said:

 

 

You misunderstand the nature and purpose of faith if you think that such an event and its recounting by its recipient would increase faith.  (See Alma 32, John 10:24-27.)  President Nelson was unequivocal about the nature of the policy change regarding the eligibility for baptism of minors reared in non-heterosexual households, but that certainly didn't result in an "increase in faith and trust from [many of] the members."  

It'll be interesting when that policy goes the way of the dinosaurs, as they say.  What will say about revelation in the church then?  Most will just say the end of the policy was by revelation and the policy was in place for a very specific reason that many might speculate on.  That speculation might even come from the prophet, officially declared as revelation, and then later such teachings will be condemned. 

I'm just saying, this has happened before. 

[Hamba Tuhan]

3 minutes ago, stemelbow said:

Most will just say the end of the policy was by revelation and the policy was in place for a very specific reason ...

So you don't want God to be able to tailor His revelations to specific times and needs?

[stemelbow]

19 hours ago, california boy said:

This kind of relates to the thread about fallibility of prophets.  Though I think it is specific enough to have it's own thread.  The question is:  What revelations from God do you think the prophets have received directly from Him since the time of Joseph Smith?  Do you think that heavenly messengers and even Christ Himself has visited the prophet?  Can any statement by any prophet since Joseph Smith's time start with "Thus sayth the Lord?

I am not talking about feelings of the Spirit that we can all have.  Or perhaps feelings of the Spirit that the prophet has concerning the church.  I am talking about communicating as Abraham of old "face to face as one man speaks to another".   Or is that kind of revelation a thing of the past??  Is the Holy Ghost the only communicator of God's will in the church today?

This is an awesome question for us LDS to consider, if you ask me.  I see some answers have said things like, "I received on yesterday" a la the Nehor.  The issue with that is, of course, if that's true, then billions of others have received the same type of revelation yesterday.  Which would suggest revelation is not just an LDS thing--is not much more than inspiration common to all.  If an LDS answers things like the Proclamation to the World, we're left with all the official statements from the leaders that are today considered wrong --take the 1949 First Presidency statement on Race for example.  We can say D&C 138 but then we'll have referred to something that came 100 years ago, which makes our on going revelation claim sound a little silly. 

Elder Renlund in a recent meeting I attended said in considering this topic, "I don't know what people are complaining about.  This Church receives revelation every minute." Referring mostly to the individual bouts of inspiration members get.  But of course, far more than members get that, so there's nothing unique to it. 

I will say if the Church was as filled with inspiration as we like to think, we'd be far more influential, far more fluid, far more interesting.  I hope for the day to come back.

[stemelbow]

4 minutes ago, Hamba Tuhan said:

So you don't want God to be able to tailor His revelations to specific times and needs?

We'd first have to assume things like the priesthood ban and it's racist explanations for it were revelation.  To assume there was revelation in the ban and in it's varied explanations, officially rendered as true by the Church, then we'd attribute to God a silly notion that is not true all because we want to think God did it to pander to the people in their particular prejudices.  That makes God less God and more "eh...whatever...true stuff doesn't matter as long as they do whatever they can to not stand out too much." 

Of course, I'd be more than happy to see God tailor His revelation to specific times.  The problem we face on that is, God's means of tailoring for our day is He aint' interested in revealing to us.  We might say, "well He doesn't give us much these days because we have enough already.  We aren't ready for more."  But we don't know.  maybe He's itching to give us something and we're to stuck in our assumptions and ease, singing the concept of all is well in zion without saying the words. 

[consiglieri]

We are two-years away from the hundred-year mark of the last revelation to be canonized in the Doctrine and Covenants.

The fact is that the LDS Church does not receive any revelation, and has not for around a century.

This issue is being raised in more and more venues because more and more Mormons are getting wise to this fact.

They are becoming dissatisfied with the excuses commonly given for why it is the Church has no more revelation.

Indeed, why would the Church have so many excuses to address this problem if it were not an issue?

In brief:

1. We are told by President Hinkley that the Church doesn't need much revelation any more because Joseph Smith received it all.

2. In the face of that, we are told that the Church receives revelation all the time, only the membership doesn't get told about the specifics.  Trust us.

3. We are also told that revelation is ongoing and we get simply scads of it in protracted semi-annual General Conferences.  Only when we start looking at the content of the addresses there, it starts to look less like revelation and more like pabulum.

 

And yet the LDS Church continues to trumpet the claim of living prophets who receive revelation directly from God.

As I say, more and more Mormons are starting to wonder about this disparity between doctrinal claims and actual practice; between the claim of ongoing revelation against the dearth of the same.

This is why I think this subject keeps being raised.

And then, to top it all off, President Nelson claims a policy targeting the children of gay couples is a revelation.  Is this what we have waited a century to receive?

Many Mormons think otherwise.

 

[Mystery Meat]

25 minutes ago, stemelbow said:

It'll be interesting when that policy goes the way of the dinosaurs, as they say.  What will say about revelation in the church then?  Most will just say the end of the policy was by revelation and the policy was in place for a very specific reason that many might speculate on.  That speculation might even come from the prophet, officially declared as revelation, and then later such teachings will be condemned. 

I'm just saying, this has happened before. 

You assume it will go away. I think in that, you will be disappointed.

[stemelbow]

4 minutes ago, Mystery Meat said:

You assume it will go away. I think in that, you will be disappointed.

I could be.  The problem is, there's not point to the policy except to slap gay people in the face, even if some don't feel the slap.  There's been no other outcome of the change except a slap in the face.  So I'd say one day the leaders will come to their senses and excise it.