Hamba Tuhan Posted October 11, 2017 Posted October 11, 2017 (edited) 30 minutes ago, rockpond said: The counsel to give up our will and seek God's will only, no matter how it makes us feel seems to be a challenge equally faced by both progressive and conservative church members (to the extent such titles are even accurate). Possibly the first time I have ever agreed with rockpond! One of the things I've (probably perversely) enjoyed viewing from afar has been American Church members who just couldn't understand the bristling of 'progressives' when asked to accept and further the doctrine of the family turning around on this very forum and bristling at the prophets' counsel to take in the stranger. Edited October 11, 2017 by Hamba Tuhan 1
llama Posted October 11, 2017 Posted October 11, 2017 9 hours ago, california boy said: So for me, I expect part of the calling of a prophet of God is to declare when he has received a revelation from God. Where's the fun in that? I expect a prophet to declare when his words aren't a revelation.
rockpond Posted October 11, 2017 Posted October 11, 2017 1 minute ago, llama said: Where's the fun in that? I expect a prophet to declare when his words aren't a revelation. That would be fine if they wanted to do that as well. But they haven't and aren't. And declaring when they aren't speaking the words of a revelation would likely be quite cumbersome.
llama Posted October 11, 2017 Posted October 11, 2017 8 hours ago, Pete Ahlstrom said: Maybe the problem lies with Joseph Smith's claims? He claimed to be receiving the actual words of Jesus and then had them published as the D&C. He seemed to be receiving these words routinely. Now, the Q12/FP doesn't receive the actual words any more or so it seems. The revelation they claim to get is a lot less direct than what Joseph Smith claimed. Theirs is more impressionistic and based more on feelings than what Joseph Smith claimed. Joseph Smith made it seem like he was having a conversation with Jesus and today not so much. They get "revelation" by committee, now, and through deliberation, which is more susceptible to being overtaken by strong opinion and mistaken opinion. That was Joseph's mistake--he was too casual with God, and in so doing he set too high of expectations on the part of the members. President Henry B. Eyring shows us how to have proper expectations in our prayers here:
llama Posted October 11, 2017 Posted October 11, 2017 24 minutes ago, rockpond said: That would be fine if they wanted to do that as well. But they haven't and aren't. And declaring when they aren't speaking the words of a revelation would likely be quite cumbersome. When you get as much revelation as the general authorities do, it's easier to say when you aren't speaking revelation than to say when you are.
rockpond Posted October 11, 2017 Posted October 11, 2017 6 minutes ago, llama said: When you get as much revelation as the general authorities do, it's easier to say when you aren't speaking revelation than to say when you are. You think? I haven't seen or heard anything to substantiate that. But, like I said, if they want to commit to letting us know whenever they aren't speaking revelation that's fine. But it sounds ridiculous to me. I'd never place such a requirement on them. And this also just brings us back to what exactly is considered revelation... we can't even seem to settle on a definition among a few active, faithful LDS on this thread.
llama Posted October 11, 2017 Posted October 11, 2017 8 hours ago, california boy said: Yeah, they better be absolutely certain that they have it right this time around. Because if it turns out that in a couple of years, church leaders change their mind about this revelation, there is no repairing the damage that has been done both within the church and outside the church. So yeah. This thing better be as real as a vision from God. They better be that sure. Because that unanimous vote that day changed the course of many peoples lives. 1 If a man claims to have a revelation that isn't a revelation, that would be blasphemy, and taking the name of God in vain. But we have the ironclad guarantee from President Russell M. Nelson that, Quote The calling of 15 men to the holy apostleship provides great protection for us as members of the Church. Why? Because decisions of these leaders must be unanimous.13 Can you imagine how the Spirit needs to move upon 15 men to bring about unanimity? These 15 men have varied educational and professional backgrounds, with differing opinions about many things. Trust me! These 15 men—prophets, seers, and revelators—know what the will of the Lord is when unanimity is reached! https://www.lds.org/general-conference/2014/10/sustaining-the-prophets?lang=eng Since unanimity was reached on the Proclamation on the Family and the policy forestalling baptism for the children of homosexuals, we have nothing to worry about. It's a revelation. Case Closed.
rockpond Posted October 11, 2017 Posted October 11, 2017 2 minutes ago, llama said: If a man claims to have a revelation that isn't a revelation, that would be blasphemy, and taking the name of God in vain. But we have the ironclad guarantee from President Russell M. Nelson that, Since unanimity was reached on the Proclamation on the Family and the policy forestalling baptism for the children of homosexuals, we have nothing to worry about. It's a revelation. Case Closed. What will you say when our current teachings regarding homosexuality are disavowed? Will you still consider the Proclamation and Nov 2015 policy to be "revelation"? Just wondering. 2
llama Posted October 11, 2017 Posted October 11, 2017 8 hours ago, smac97 said: A year-long process involving eleven prophets and apostles with literally centuries of cumulative experience with things of the Spirit has a pretty good chance of yielding a work product that is the result of revelation, and not merely "their best opinion." Thanks for dropping the Smac(Kdown) on this. When you think of the centuries of collective experience the FP and Q12 have with the revelatory process, and compare it with the <3 years of experience Joseph Smith had when God gave him most of the D&C (and the apostles weren't even called yet), I think it's safe to say the Proclamation on the Family is better scripture than most anything we have in the D&C.
rockpond Posted October 11, 2017 Posted October 11, 2017 1 minute ago, llama said: Thanks for dropping the Smac(Kdown) on this. When you think of the centuries of collective experience the FP and Q12 have with the revelatory process, and compare it with the <3 years of experience Joseph Smith had when God gave him most of the D&C (and the apostles weren't even called yet), I think it's safe to say the Proclamation on the Family is better scripture than most anything we have in the D&C. Wow. Let's just dismiss God from the church while we're at it.
llama Posted October 11, 2017 Posted October 11, 2017 19 minutes ago, rockpond said: What will you say when our current teachings regarding homosexuality are disavowed? Will you still consider the Proclamation and Nov 2015 policy to be "revelation"? Just wondering. Who will be disavowing our current doctrine regarding homosexuality? Certainly not me, and certainly not the General Authorities.
Jeanne Posted October 11, 2017 Posted October 11, 2017 2 minutes ago, llama said: Who will be disavowing our current doctrine regarding homosexuality? Certainly not me, and certainly not the General Authorities. Time will tell. The 2015 policy threw the loop for a lot of LDS on every level of faith. This did not just affect the disaffected or just the gay community. It was a realization for some that they could not (at least on this policy) see where God and a Prophet could connect the dots. 2
Bernard Gui Posted October 11, 2017 Posted October 11, 2017 28 minutes ago, rockpond said: What will you say when our current teachings regarding homosexuality are disavowed? Will you still consider the Proclamation and Nov 2015 policy to be "revelation"? Just wondering. What will we say when it's not disavowed?
rockpond Posted October 11, 2017 Posted October 11, 2017 19 minutes ago, llama said: Who will be disavowing our current doctrine regarding homosexuality? Certainly not me, and certainly not the General Authorities. A future generation of General Authorities of the Church.
JLHPROF Posted October 11, 2017 Posted October 11, 2017 1 minute ago, rockpond said: A future generation of General Authorities of the Church. That will guarantee that revelation will have ceased.
rockpond Posted October 11, 2017 Posted October 11, 2017 11 minutes ago, Bernard Gui said: What will we say when it's not disavowed? Same stuff we're reading right here on this thread... we're currently following the same pattern we followed with other teachings that were disavowed. We're on track and on schedule. Never fear - the restoration continues.
rockpond Posted October 11, 2017 Posted October 11, 2017 Just now, JLHPROF said: That will guarantee that revelation will have ceased. Are we sure it hasn't already? When was the last time the Prophet and President of the Church declared a new revelation?
JLHPROF Posted October 11, 2017 Posted October 11, 2017 (edited) 8 minutes ago, rockpond said: Are we sure it hasn't already? When was the last time the Prophet and President of the Church declared a new revelation? Well, if we are to believe as was recently claimed at General Conference that the Proclamation came by revelation then any subsequent revelation allowing homosexuality can be dismissed as false. At least according to the Prophet Joseph. God cannot contradict himself or prior revelation. Doesn't guarantee that it won't happen. Only that we can label it as a false revelation of it does. Edited October 11, 2017 by JLHPROF
Hamba Tuhan Posted October 11, 2017 Posted October 11, 2017 33 minutes ago, rockpond said: Are we sure it hasn't already? When was the last time the Prophet and President of the Church declared a new revelation? I think this is called 'coming full circle'... <sigh> 1
Hamba Tuhan Posted October 11, 2017 Posted October 11, 2017 26 minutes ago, JLHPROF said: Well, if we are to believe as was recently claimed at General Conference that the Proclamation came by revelation then any subsequent revelation allowing homosexuality can be dismissed as false. At least according to the Prophet Joseph. God cannot contradict himself or prior revelation. So God can't do things like reveal blood sacrifices and then reveal their cessation??? Or continue to adjust his revealed commandments according to the ever-changing needs of His people and their interaction with the world in which they live? That doesn't sound anything like the Joseph Smith I've come to know... 2
JLHPROF Posted October 11, 2017 Posted October 11, 2017 (edited) 7 minutes ago, Hamba Tuhan said: So God can't do things like reveal blood sacrifices and then reveal their cessation??? Or continue to adjust his revealed commandments according to the ever-changing needs of His people and their interaction with the world in which they live? That doesn't sound anything like the Joseph Smith I've come to know... God can command and revoke commandments and the attendant blessings. He cannot change or revoke eternal law or truth. God through his prophets has told us many things that he cannot do. Joseph clearly said contradicting a previous revelation identifies the new revelation as false. It would make the first a lie, and God cannot lie. Edited October 11, 2017 by JLHPROF
Rivers Posted October 11, 2017 Posted October 11, 2017 48 minutes ago, rockpond said: Are we sure it hasn't already? When was the last time the Prophet and President of the Church declared a new revelation? 1978. 1995 if you count the Proclamation. How often did the original 12 apostles receive new revelations?
Hamba Tuhan Posted October 11, 2017 Posted October 11, 2017 13 minutes ago, JLHPROF said: God can command and revoke commandments and the attendant blessings. He cannot change or revoke eternal law or truth. God through his prophets has told us many things that he cannot do. Joseph clearly said contradicting a previous revelation identifies the new revelation as false. It would make the first a lie, and God cannot lie. So was it a revelation to Adam to perform animal sacrifices?
JLHPROF Posted October 11, 2017 Posted October 11, 2017 6 minutes ago, Hamba Tuhan said: So was it a revelation to Adam to perform animal sacrifices? Yes, and it will be practiced again. https://www.fairmormon.org/answers/Question:_Did_Joseph_Smith_teach_animal_sacrifice_as_part_of_the_"restoration_of_all_things"%3F
Hamba Tuhan Posted October 11, 2017 Posted October 11, 2017 9 minutes ago, JLHPROF said: Yes, and it will be practiced again. So is 3 Nephi 9:19 also a revelation? It claims to be the words of Jesus Christ. And how about circumcision, to pick another? Or a seventh-day Sabbath?
Recommended Posts