Home/Visiting Teaching to be discontinued

[The Nehor]

14 minutes ago, JLHPROF said:

The "Church", ie the restored gospel will not fail.  The keys were restored for the last time.  Neither of those precludes the Church from going astray at times or acting contrary to God's will in something.  Apostasies can be partial, complete, on one single issue, on a viewpoint, and more.  Nobody claims that there will ever be another great apostasy.  But there will be plenty for the Lord to set right.

As for Pres. Kimball's revelation- we have no idea.  None of us were there, no recorded revelation seems to exist.

But revelation is God's word.  Not a good feeling. If God told Pres. Kimball to do what he did, that was the word of God.  If Pres. Kimball and the apostles "felt it was right", that was not.

Revelation is when God speaks to us.  If we cannot record his words, whether they come to our minds, our spirits,  in vision or dream, or through holy records, then it is not revelation.  If all we get is a feeling, that is not the word of the Lord.

I disrespectfully disagree.

[SteveO]

7 hours ago, JLHPROF said:

Because this is NOT revelation:

• "Our unity helps us to discern the Lord’s will for His Church.
  We listen prayerfully to one another and talk with each other until we are united. Then when we have reached complete accord, the unifying influence of the Holy Ghost is spine-tingling! We experience what the Prophet Joseph Smith knew when he taught, “By union of feeling we obtain power with God.”

It could represent the will of God, it might not.  Revelation is when God speaks to man.  Prayer is when man speaks to God.
When God doesn't speak, but you feel good and united on an issue, that is not revelation.  Numerous revelations have come to the prophets that came without unity in the quorum.  And a feeling of unity doesn't guarantee God's involvement.  It might be inspired or it might not.
 

What was the election of Mathias to fill the vacancy left by Judas?  Casting lots seems awfully like “unity” and  “consensus”.

Alma when teaching his son Corianton, gives his opinion a lot, and there are many things he admits to inquiring of the Lord, but never receiving clarification.

And I would keep in mind how it would be treated by the general public, and even by some posters, if president Nelson spoke openly over the pulpit of communing with God in a regular basis.

[rockpond]

3 hours ago, The Nehor said:

So was the prophecy that the keys would never again be taken from the earth or the church fall again prophecy of the old or prophecy of the new kind?

Was President Kimball’s decision to extend the Priesthood to all worthy males similarly tainted?

Claiming that revelation is diminished or gone though because it does not match that of your expectations leads down a dark and pathetically cliched path:

“Apply this in modern times and you have the so-called reformers. Many budding apostates follow the pattern progressively. They allege love for the gospel and the Church but charge that leaders are a little “off the beam”! Soon they claim that the leaders are making changes and not following the original programs. Next they say that while the gospel and the Church are divine, the leaders are fallen. Up to this time it may be a passive thing, but now it becomes an active resistance and frequently the blooming apostate begins to air his views and to crusade. He is likely now to join groups who are slipping away. He may become a student of the Journal of Discourses and is flattered by the evil one that he knows more about the scriptures and doctrines than the Church leaders who, he says, are now persecuting him. He generally wants all the blessings of the Church; membership, its Priesthood, its temple privileges, and expects them from the leaders of the Church, though at the same time claiming that those same leaders have departed from the path. He now begins to expect persecution and adapts a martyr complex, and when finally excommunication comes he associates himself with other apostates to develop or strengthen cults. At this stage he is likely to claim revelation for himself; revelations from the Lord directing him in his interpretation and his actions. These manifestations are superior to anything from living leaders, he claims.” -Spencer W. Kimball

I have not claimed that revelation has “diminished or gone”.  I stated that the church is currently being governed by consensus, rather than revelation, based on what Presidents Nelson and Oaks have taught in the last two general conferences. 

They refer to it revelation or a revelatory process but I agree with the definition of revelation as JHLPROF has explained it. 

I sustain President Nelson (even though the Q12 failed to follow the D&C with respect to his ordination) and I believe he has the keys to receive revelation for the Church. I welcome such revelation. 

[Marginal Gains]

10 hours ago, The Nehor said:

Let them cut their relationship with the Priesthood Order, kick themselves out of the church, and go to hell I guess.

What kind of a response are you looking for?

Well, a discussion around the fact that two individuals can have opposing revelations about the exact same thing. Why do you think that is?

[The Nehor]

6 hours ago, Marginal Gains said:

Well, a discussion around the fact that two individuals can have opposing revelations about the exact same thing. Why do you think that is?

Many are mistaken. Many lie.

[The Nehor]

7 hours ago, rockpond said:

I have not claimed that revelation has “diminished or gone”.  I stated that the church is currently being governed by consensus, rather than revelation, based on what Presidents Nelson and Oaks have taught in the last two general conferences. 

They refer to it revelation or a revelatory process but I agree with the definition of revelation as JHLPROF has explained it. 

I sustain President Nelson (even though the Q12 failed to follow the D&C with respect to his ordination) and I believe he has the keys to receive revelation for the Church. I welcome such revelation. 

Your statement of how the Church is governed is wrong. 

Pull up before it is too late.

[rockpond]

3 hours ago, The Nehor said:

Your statement of how the Church is governed is wrong. 

Pull up before it is too late.

No need.  Just sharing what they taught in the last two conferences. 

[rockpond]

3 hours ago, The Nehor said:

Many are mistaken. Many lie.

And there we have it... seems that we can go to the Lord with our questions but if the answers we receive are different than what the Brethren currently teach we are deemed to be mistaken or lying.  

Kinda defeats the purpose of personal revelation. But it’s what I anticipated. 

[SteveO]

34 minutes ago, rockpond said:

And there we have it... seems that we can go to the Lord with our questions but if the answers we receive are different than what the Brethren currently teach we are deemed to be mistaken or lying.  

Kinda defeats the purpose of personal revelation. But it’s what I anticipated. 

So you've received personal revelation on various topics directly opposed to those of the current church leadership?  If the leadership is wrong, why would God just tell you and not me?  Its interesting how you guys receiving revelation contrary to leadership have the whole process nailed down and crystal clear...I must be doing something wrong.

[Avatar4321]

13 hours ago, SteveO said:

What was the election of Mathias to fill the vacancy left by Judas?  Casting lots seems awfully like “unity” and  “consensus”.

Alma when teaching his son Corianton, gives his opinion a lot, and there are many things he admits to inquiring of the Lord, but never receiving clarification.

And I would keep in mind how it would be treated by the general public, and even by some posters, if president Nelson spoke openly over the pulpit of communing with God in a regular basis.

One of the Apostles mentioned the Savior appearing to them. I suspect it would be largely ignored like it was this time

[Avatar4321]

1 hour ago, rockpond said:

No need.  Just sharing what they taught in the last two conferences. 

What they taught and what you think they taught are not the same brother 

[Avatar4321]

54 minutes ago, SteveO said:

So you've received personal revelation on various topics directly opposed to those of the current church leadership?  If the leadership is wrong, why would God just tell you and not me?  Its interesting how you guys receiving revelation contrary to leadership have the whole process nailed down and crystal clear...I must be doing something wrong.

As am I.

 

In my experience, personal revelation brings us into unity with those who hold the keys not against that

[rockpond]

2 hours ago, SteveO said:

So you've received personal revelation on various topics directly opposed to those of the current church leadership?  If the leadership is wrong, why would God just tell you and not me?  Its interesting how you guys receiving revelation contrary to leadership have the whole process nailed down and crystal clear...I must be doing something wrong.

I’m not sure why we are getting different personal revelation but I’ve learned to be comfortable with the ambiguity. 

 

1 hour ago, Avatar4321 said:

As am I.

 

In my experience, personal revelation brings us into unity with those who hold the keys not against that

That’s good.  But, if we are going to dismiss anything that differs from turn Brethren it becomes somewhat meaningless to ask. 

[SteveO]

25 minutes ago, rockpond said:

I’m not sure why we are getting different personal revelation but I’ve learned to be comfortable with the ambiguity. 

My question wasn't meant to be rhetorical.  Please answer it.   

[rockpond]

26 minutes ago, SteveO said:

My question wasn't meant to be rhetorical.  Please answer it.   

The question of whether I have receive personal revelation that differs from the Brethren?  Yes. 

[SteveO]

8 minutes ago, rockpond said:

The question of whether I have receive personal revelation that differs from the Brethren?  Yes. 

So you belong to a church who has claimed prophets and apostles for nearly 185 years.  These leaders have claimed to be the mouthpiece of the Lord during that time, as they have in every dispensation.  And you’ve received a personal witness that has confirmed to you that what these men are saying isn’t from God, that it is their own personal views.  And contrary to His will, God is continuing to let these men voice their opinion to millions of followers, all the while telling you and a few others what He really means?

Do I have that right?

I

[rockpond]

1 hour ago, SteveO said:

So you belong to a church who has claimed prophets and apostles for nearly 185 years.  These leaders have claimed to be the mouthpiece of the Lord during that time, as they have in every dispensation.  And you’ve received a personal witness that has confirmed to you that what these men are saying isn’t from God, that it is their own personal views.  And contrary to His will, God is continuing to let these men voice their opinion to millions of followers, all the while telling you and a few others what He really means?

Do I have that right?

I

No.  You are trying to extrapolate quite a bit.  Not sure why you feel the need to do that. 

[SteveO]

22 minutes ago, rockpond said:

No.  You are trying to extrapolate quite a bit.  Not sure why you feel the need to do that. 

You going to tell me I extrapolated and leave it at that, or help me understand where I’m wrong?

[rockpond]

1 hour ago, SteveO said:

You going to tell me I extrapolated and leave it at that, or help me understand where I’m wrong?

This line of questioning began when I wrote that per what President Nelson and then-Elder Oaks taught in the last two conferences, it seems that the church is being governed by consensus rather than revelation.  

I stand by that.  I think they’ve been clear with us. 

My other beliefs seem irrelevant to the thread but I’m happy to answer questions as long as they don’t seem hostile.

[SteveO]

35 minutes ago, rockpond said:

This line of questioning began when I wrote that per what President Nelson and then-Elder Oaks taught in the last two conferences, it seems that the church is being governed by consensus rather than revelation.  

I stand by that.  I think they’ve been clear with us. 

My other beliefs seem irrelevant to the thread but I’m happy to answer questions as long as they don’t seem hostile.

I’m not trying to be hostile, I am wanting to get to the point though.

You’ll have to explain to me how the vacancy left by Judas was filled.  If “casting  lots” isn’t a form of consensus, I don’t know what is.

Patriachs often say that the words for blessings come very easily at first, ie actual images, words, and phrases.  As time goes on though, the patriarch has to be more and more spiritually receptive to the promptings.  I think that the church operates like that.  We are no Martin Handcart company, and to witness the miracles and closeness to God their sacrifice and hardship brought about, we likewise have to sacrifice—but we obviously go about it differently. We’re the same church, but we’re also not the same church.

Now. You said you have received personal revelation that differs from the brethren.  Ok.  The prophet says “position X is the standard church-wide, and will keep violators from the blessings of the temple”.  You go to the Lord and receive a personal witness that what the prophet has said is not the will of the Lord.  How was I extrapolating when I said that the prophet, with the Lord’s consent, would have to be teaching millions incorrectly, while at the same time telling you otherwise?

 

 

 

 

[rockpond]

8 minutes ago, SteveO said:

I’m not trying to be hostile, I am wanting to get to the point though.

1) You’ll have to explain to me how the vacancy left by Judas was filled.  If “casting  lots” isn’t a form of consensus, I don’t know what is.

2) Patriachs often say that the words for blessings come very easily at first, ie actual images, words, and phrases.  As time goes on though, the patriarch has to be more and more spiritually receptive to the promptings.  I think that the church operates like that.  We are no Martin Handcart company, and to witness the miracles and closeness to God their sacrifice and hardship brought about, we likewise have to sacrifice—but we obviously go about it differently. We’re the same church, but we’re also not the same church.

3) Now. You said you have received personal revelation that differs from the brethren.  Ok.  The prophet says “position X is the standard church-wide, and will keep violators from the blessings of the temple”.  You go to the Lord and receive a personal witness that what the prophet has said is not the will of the Lord.  How was I extrapolating when I said that the prophet, with the Lord’s consent, would have to be teaching millions incorrectly, while at the same time telling you otherwise?

I numbered your paragraphs to assist in replying, I hope that’s okay. 

1) Drawing lots isn’t consensus.  It also isn’t revelation.  Perhaps it was a miracle in that the Lord may have controlled the lots to fill the vacancy as He desired. 

2) No disagreement here. 

3) Prophets can and do make mistakes.  But I’ve never claimed that personal revelation given to me applies to anyone else. 

Edited April 8, 2018 by rockpond

[Glenn101]

9 hours ago, rockpond said:

Kinda defeats the purpose of personal revelation. But it’s what I anticipated. 

Personal revelation is just that. Not for the church.What you are claiming creates a spiritual dissonance, as one poster has noted, the brethren teaching millions of people things that are incorrect while a few are receiving the real truth and leads to people like Denver Snuffer and others claiming that the brethren have gone astray. The well worn caveat is that our leaders are men susceptible to error while seemingly the people claiming that the brethren are in error must not be susceptible to error.

I respect the time and spiritual effort the brethren put into the decisions that they make and promulgate. I believe that as a quorum and a presidency, they are a whole lot less likely to make mistakes as to policies etc. than those who are not called to those positions.

Glenn

[rockpond]

2 minutes ago, Glenn101 said:

Personal revelation is just that. Not for the church.What you are claiming creates a spiritual dissonance, as one poster has noted, the brethren teaching millions of people things that are incorrect while a few are receiving the real truth and leads to people like Denver Snuffer and others claiming that the brethren have gone astray. The well worn caveat is that our leaders are men susceptible to error while seemingly the people claiming that the brethren are in error must not be susceptible to error.

I respect the time and spiritual effort the brethren put into the decisions that they make and promulgate. I believe that as a quorum and a presidency, they are a whole lot less likely to make mistakes as to policies etc. than those who are not called to those positions.

Glenn

I agree that my personal revelation is not for the church.  I have not suggested otherwise.  And, I also heartily acknowledge that I am susceptible to error.

I appreciate your testimony of the Brethren.

p.s.  I personally don't believe in the validity of the "can't go astray" doctrine so I think we need to be careful with that.  And, no, I'm not a follower of Denver Snuffer.

[The Nehor]

13 hours ago, rockpond said:

And there we have it... seems that we can go to the Lord with our questions but if the answers we receive are different than what the Brethren currently teach we are deemed to be mistaken or lying.  

Kinda defeats the purpose of personal revelation. But it’s what I anticipated. 

If you are convinced you have received revelation act on it. Seriously, do it. If you are refusing to act on revelation because I disagree it must be pretty weak revelation.

Just do not expect anyone else to automatically believe you as such revelation is contrary to the order of the Church. As Brigham Young taught if an individual member does receive revelation about the future or current events that does not fall under their stewardship then they should keep quiet and treasure it for themselves until the oracles of God speak on the subject.

If you want to play at being the next Joseph Smith seeing through the Apostasy then you have to expect the same reception. Expecting members to give credence to your revelations that are contrary to the order of the Church is ridiculous.

[rockpond]

6 hours ago, The Nehor said:

If you are convinced you have received revelation act on it. Seriously, do it. If you are refusing to act on revelation because I disagree it must be pretty weak revelation.

I'm not sure why you think I am not acting on it.

6 hours ago, The Nehor said:

Just do not expect anyone else to automatically believe you as such revelation is contrary to the order of the Church. As Brigham Young taught if an individual member does receive revelation about the future or current events that does not fall under their stewardship then they should keep quiet and treasure it for themselves until the oracles of God speak on the subject.

I don't expect anyone else to automatically believe me and, or course, it is only my stewardship.  I've already made these points.

6 hours ago, The Nehor said:

If you want to play at being the next Joseph Smith seeing through the Apostasy then you have to expect the same reception. Expecting members to give credence to your revelations that are contrary to the order of the Church is ridiculous.

Big ol' strawman here.  Nothing I've said should have even suggested you arrive at this point.