D&C 138; why the last section of the Doctrine and Covenants?

[Bill “Papa” Lee]

Doctrine and Convents 138, fills in the many blanks, of a major and important tenant of our Faith. A tenant of Faith that should be as important to every Christian Faith, as our own. However, it belongs only to our Faith (for the most part, if not in total) even though it is almost entirely Biblical. In its opening verses (7-10), spell out some, but not all of the scriptures from the Bible, that pertains to this doctrine. It does not mention, 1 Corinthians 15, which defines much about our lives hereafter, and verse 29, which eludes to a doctrine lost to modern day Christianity. However D&C 138, provides so much color, and texture of this marvelous doctrine, so very well. I have been on many “splits”, or “team ups”, where this section was not even referenced, even though the doctrine was. I have even attended Sunday School classes on the New Testament, that speaks of this doctrine, and the scriptures that address it, where D&C 138, was used or addressed, to aide in needed explanation. In many cases it is barely touched upon, and only mentioned in passing, during the years when we study the Doctrine and Covenants. It is both a powerful section, and a wonder part of scripture, that it seems it should  
 

Beyond D&C 138, we have two “official declarations”, even though they were (I assume) revelations, but were not added as a form of a recognized, “scriptural canon”. Even other sections of the D&C by John Taylor, and Brigham Young, are not (by most’ viewed in the same light (or so it seems), as the revelations of the Prophet Joseph Smith. In more recent times, we have “agreed joint statements”, shared by and signed, or endorsed by all existing members of the Apostles. This of course means all of the “Prophets, Seers and Revelators”. 
 

For those of you here who are “Church Scholars”, (be it official, by study, or by appointment), have we moved into a new age just declarations by “governing assembly”? Is there a reason that we no longer add to “Scriptural Canon”? Will we ever have another, be it one or many, like the Prophet Joseph Smith, and Joseph F. Smith who received revelation, that was added to the D&C, as direct, and Devine revelation? Scripture in a manner where the Apostles will add to our scriptures, other than publishing letters, or declarations, collectively?  Will there ever be another time where a Prophet and President, will bring forth a revelation, that uses the writing style that all are accustomed to, found throughout the the Doctrine and Covenants? Meaning, received by the Prophet, be it through a vision, or the words of the Savior, and then become part of the D&C, as directed by the twelve? 
 

I am sure I am clumsily falling all over my words and thoughts, so I pray for the Grace to be understood as to my overall questions. I have been reading D&C 138, an activity I highly recommend, which has left me wanting more of this kind of writing and revelation. I understand that my comments may be misunderstood, and I know there is much to learn from the words of our leaders today. I just love the (to me) the “poetry”, and the “inspiration”, that I enjoy for from the writings of Bible, Book of Mormon, Doctrine and Covenants, and Pearl of Great Price”, that speaks so deeply to my soul.
 

This is an unusually long thread for me, so please forgive my many errors that I am sure (know) exist.
 

Thanks to all who reply,

Your brother...

Bill     

[Tacenda]

1 hour ago, Bill “Papa” Lee said:

Doctrine and Convents 138, fills in the many blanks, of a major and important tenant of our Faith. A tenant of Faith that should be as important to every Christian Faith, as our own. However, it belongs only to our Faith (for the most part, if not in total) even though it is almost entirely Biblical. In its opening verses (7-10), spell out some, but not all of the scriptures from the Bible, that pertains to this doctrine. It does not mention, 1 Corinthians 15, which defines much about our lives hereafter, and verse 29, which eludes to a doctrine lost to modern day Christianity. However D&C 138, provides so much color, and texture of this marvelous doctrine, so very well. I have been on many “splits”, or “team ups”, where this section was not even referenced, even though the doctrine was. I have even attended Sunday School classes on the New Testament, that speaks of this doctrine, and the scriptures that address it, where D&C 138, was used or addressed, to aide in needed explanation. In many cases it is barely touched upon, and only mentioned in passing, during the years when we study the Doctrine and Covenants. It is both a powerful section, and a wonder part of scripture, that it seems it should  
 

Beyond D&C 138, we have two “official declarations”, even though they were (I assume) revelations, but were not added as a form of a recognized, “scriptural canon”. Even other sections of the D&C by John Taylor, and Brigham Young, are not (by most’ viewed in the same light (or so it seems), as the revelations of the Prophet Joseph Smith. In more recent times, we have “agreed joint statements”, shared by and signed, or endorsed by all existing members of the Apostles. This of course means all of the “Prophets, Seers and Revelators”. 
 

For those of you here who are “Church Scholars”, (be it official, by study, or by appointment), have we moved into a new age just declarations by “governing assembly”? Is there a reason that we no longer add to “Scriptural Canon”? Will we ever have another, be it one or many, like the Prophet Joseph Smith, and Joseph F. Smith who received revelation, that was added to the D&C, as direct, and Devine revelation? Scripture in a manner where the Apostles will add to our scriptures, other than publishing letters, or declarations, collectively?  Will there ever be another time where a Prophet and President, will bring forth a revelation, that uses the writing style that all are accustomed to, found throughout the the Doctrine and Covenants? Meaning, received by the Prophet, be it through a vision, or the words of the Savior, and then become part of the D&C, as directed by the twelve? 
 

I am sure I am clumsily falling all over my words and thoughts, so I pray for the Grace to be understood as to my overall questions. I have been reading D&C 138, an activity I highly recommend, which has left me wanting more of this kind of writing and revelation. I understand that my comments may be misunderstood, and I know there is much to learn from the words of our leaders today. I just love the (to me) the “poetry”, and the “inspiration”, that I enjoy for from the writings of Bible, Book of Mormon, Doctrine and Covenants, and Pearl of Great Price”, that speaks so deeply to my soul.
 

This is an unusually long thread for me, so please forgive my many errors that I am sure (know) exist.
 

Thanks to all who reply,

Your brother...

Bill     

I think the church handbook, the newer recent one, has become like scripture. https://www.churchofjesuschrist.org/study/ensign/2015/09/church-handbooks-the-written-order-of-things?lang=eng

Edited January 16, 2021 by Tacenda

[JLHPROF]

I don't foresee a prophet claiming the actual words of Christ again.  Make of that what you will.

It will always be their own voice moving forward with the claim it is what God wanted said.

But I'm sure something will be canonized in the future.  Probably the proclamation on family next.

[teddyaware]

2 hours ago, Bill “Papa” Lee said:

Doctrine and Convents 138, fills in the many blanks, of a major and important tenant of our Faith. A tenant of Faith that should be as important to every Christian Faith, as our own. However, it belongs only to our Faith (for the most part, if not in total) even though it is almost entirely Biblical. In its opening verses (7-10), spell out some, but not all of the scriptures from the Bible, that pertains to this doctrine. It does not mention, 1 Corinthians 15, which defines much about our lives hereafter, and verse 29, which eludes to a doctrine lost to modern day Christianity. However D&C 138, provides so much color, and texture of this marvelous doctrine, so very well. I have been on many “splits”, or “team ups”, where this section was not even referenced, even though the doctrine was. I have even attended Sunday School classes on the New Testament, that speaks of this doctrine, and the scriptures that address it, where D&C 138, was used or addressed, to aide in needed explanation. In many cases it is barely touched upon, and only mentioned in passing, during the years when we study the Doctrine and Covenants. It is both a powerful section, and a wonder part of scripture, that it seems it should  
 

Beyond D&C 138, we have two “official declarations”, even though they were (I assume) revelations, but were not added as a form of a recognized, “scriptural canon”. Even other sections of the D&C by John Taylor, and Brigham Young, are not (by most’ viewed in the same light (or so it seems), as the revelations of the Prophet Joseph Smith. In more recent times, we have “agreed joint statements”, shared by and signed, or endorsed by all existing members of the Apostles. This of course means all of the “Prophets, Seers and Revelators”. 
 

For those of you here who are “Church Scholars”, (be it official, by study, or by appointment), have we moved into a new age just declarations by “governing assembly”? Is there a reason that we no longer add to “Scriptural Canon”? Will we ever have another, be it one or many, like the Prophet Joseph Smith, and Joseph F. Smith who received revelation, that was added to the D&C, as direct, and Devine revelation? Scripture in a manner where the Apostles will add to our scriptures, other than publishing letters, or declarations, collectively?  Will there ever be another time where a Prophet and President, will bring forth a revelation, that uses the writing style that all are accustomed to, found throughout the the Doctrine and Covenants? Meaning, received by the Prophet, be it through a vision, or the words of the Savior, and then become part of the D&C, as directed by the twelve? 
 

I am sure I am clumsily falling all over my words and thoughts, so I pray for the Grace to be understood as to my overall questions. I have been reading D&C 138, an activity I highly recommend, which has left me wanting more of this kind of writing and revelation. I understand that my comments may be misunderstood, and I know there is much to learn from the words of our leaders today. I just love the (to me) the “poetry”, and the “inspiration”, that I enjoy for from the writings of Bible, Book of Mormon, Doctrine and Covenants, and Pearl of Great Price”, that speaks so deeply to my soul.
 

This is an unusually long thread for me, so please forgive my many errors that I am sure (know) exist.
 

Thanks to all who reply,

Your brother...

Bill     

Joseph Fielding Smith once said he had firsthand knowledge that the private files of the First Presidency and Quorum of the Twelve are filled with many revelations that have been given by the Lord since D&C 138, but that these revelations are only for those in the two highest councils of the Church to see. Why? Likely because the Church at large is too unworthy and spiritually unprepared to see them.

I also believe that for a wise purpose the Lord only wants the 15 to finish their addresses ‘in the name of Christ’ because he wants the revelations he is willing to share with the general membership to, in a manner of speaking, ‘fly under screen.’ For example, I just read elder Soares last General Conference address and the Spirit confirmed to me that his every world was indeed scripture, but scripture that is not as yet canonized in the standard works. By teaching the Church by the power of the Spirit in this less forthright manner the members are able to be spiritually fed by continuous revelation without the Lord’s will being, as it were, crammed down their throats in an overwhelmingly heavy handed way.

Anyway, in this day and age we’re way too soft, myopic and fragile to be ready to hear a prophet of the Lord say, “thus sayeth the Lord.” I can assure you that if the leaders ever started saying that again you would hear many members complain nonstop. Even worse, the world would come down on the Church like a ton of bricks with red hot outrage and mockery on steroids.

Edited January 16, 2021 by teddyaware

[Bill “Papa” Lee]

5 minutes ago, teddyaware said:

Joseph Fielding Smith once said he had firsthand knowledge that the private files of the First Presidency and Quorum of the Twelve are filled with many revelations that have been given by the Lord since D&C 138, but that these revelations are only for those in the two highest councils of the Church to see. Why? Likely because the Church at large is too unworthy and spiritually unprepared to see them.

I also believe that for a wise purpose the Lord only wants the 15 to finish their addresses ‘in the name of Christ’ because he wants the revelations he is willing to share with the general membership to, in a manner of speaking, ‘fly under screen.’ For example, I just read elder Soares last General Conference address and the Spirit confirmed to me that his every world was indeed scripture, but scripture that is not as yet canonized in the standard works. By teaching the Church by the power of the Spirit in this less forthright manner the members are able to be spiritually fed by continuous revelation without the Lord’s will being, as it were, crammed down their throats in an overwhelmingly heavy handed way.

Anyway, in this day and age we’re way too soft, myopic and fragile to be ready to hear a prophet of the Lord say, “thus sayeth the Lord.” I can assure you that if the leaders ever started saying that again you would hear many members complain nonstop. Even worse, the world would come down on the Church like a ton of bricks with red hot outrage and mockery on steroids.

Maybe many are not ready, but we are, or can be made ready by being tested and tried. At some point, we must be made aware of the “entire (Eternal) truth”, to be able to receive more truth. “Man does not live by bread alone, but by every word that proceeds out of the mouth of God”. Steel is made strong in the fire of the furnace, not the cool of the day. Of course this is just my opinion, and this is why I ask the counsel of others. Jesus spoke in parables to the believer, to “confound the wicked, but to teach the righteous”. Joseph Fielding Smith, has been gone for a very long time, have any of these “revelations”, given to the twelve, been given to us yet? Anyway, thank you for your reply, it has been helpful, as counsel always is between one another. God bless you. 

[teddyaware]

22 minutes ago, Bill “Papa” Lee said:

Maybe many are not ready, but we are, or can be made ready by being tested and tried. At some point, we must be made aware of the “entire (Eternal) truth”, to be able to receive more truth. “Man does not live by bread alone, but by every word that proceeds out of the mouth of God”. Steel is made strong in the fire of the furnace, not the cool of the day. Of course this is just my opinion, and this is why I ask the counsel of others. Jesus spoke in parables to the believer, to “confound the wicked, but to teach the righteous”. Joseph Fielding Smith, has been gone for a very long time, have any of these “revelations”, given to the twelve, been given to us yet? Anyway, thank you for your reply, it has been helpful, as counsel always is between one another. God bless you. 

No, as far as I know none of the revelations Joseph Fielding Smith spoke of have been revealed to the members at large.

I’m sure you remember President Nelson has been testifying to the members of late that the time has come for the members to, as it were, become their own prophets and not to look for General Authorities to spoon feed them the will of the Lord any longer. At this point, many members are going to have to receive their own personal revelation because the truth is too controversial and/or dangerous for the leaders to state publicly. The Church leaders will still teach us by continuous revelation as much as they’re able, but we’re now going to have to learn much of what we need to know from the Lord on our own through personal revelation.

[Robert F. Smith]

Official, major revelations nearly always come in answer to a question or need.  Could it be that we haven't had any pressing needs lately?  If we were to have a new revelation, what would it most likely cover?

[longview]

1 hour ago, Robert F. Smith said:

Official, major revelations nearly always come in answer to a question or need.  Could it be that we haven't had any pressing needs lately?  If we were to have a new revelation, what would it most likely cover?

When the SHTF happens, there will be revelations aplenty for directing the Saints on where to escape out in the wilderness.  There will be no point for the church to be involved with the wicked warring against the wicked.

[JustAnAustralian]

3 hours ago, teddyaware said:

Anyway, in this day and age we’re way too soft, myopic and fragile to be ready to hear a prophet of the Lord say, “thus sayeth the Lord.” I can assure you that if the leaders ever started saying that again you would hear many members complain nonstop. Even worse, the world would come down on the Church like a ton of bricks with red hot outrage and mockery on steroids.

You just need to look at what happened in 2015 for a recent incidence of that.

[teddyaware]

6 hours ago, JustAnAustralian said:

You just need to look at what happened in 2015 for a recent incidence of that.

Refresh my memory as I’m not sure to what you’re referring?

[CV75]

12 hours ago, Bill “Papa” Lee said:

Doctrine and Convents 138, fills in the many blanks, of a major and important tenant of our Faith. A tenant of Faith that should be as important to every Christian Faith, as our own. However, it belongs only to our Faith (for the most part, if not in total) even though it is almost entirely Biblical. In its opening verses (7-10), spell out some, but not all of the scriptures from the Bible, that pertains to this doctrine. It does not mention, 1 Corinthians 15, which defines much about our lives hereafter, and verse 29, which eludes to a doctrine lost to modern day Christianity. However D&C 138, provides so much color, and texture of this marvelous doctrine, so very well. I have been on many “splits”, or “team ups”, where this section was not even referenced, even though the doctrine was. I have even attended Sunday School classes on the New Testament, that speaks of this doctrine, and the scriptures that address it, where D&C 138, was used or addressed, to aide in needed explanation. In many cases it is barely touched upon, and only mentioned in passing, during the years when we study the Doctrine and Covenants. It is both a powerful section, and a wonder part of scripture, that it seems it should  

Beyond D&C 138, we have two “official declarations”, even though they were (I assume) revelations, but were not added as a form of a recognized, “scriptural canon”. Even other sections of the D&C by John Taylor, and Brigham Young, are not (by most’ viewed in the same light (or so it seems), as the revelations of the Prophet Joseph Smith. In more recent times, we have “agreed joint statements”, shared by and signed, or endorsed by all existing members of the Apostles. This of course means all of the “Prophets, Seers and Revelators”. 

For those of you here who are “Church Scholars”, (be it official, by study, or by appointment), have we moved into a new age just declarations by “governing assembly”? Is there a reason that we no longer add to “Scriptural Canon”? Will we ever have another, be it one or many, like the Prophet Joseph Smith, and Joseph F. Smith who received revelation, that was added to the D&C, as direct, and Devine revelation? Scripture in a manner where the Apostles will add to our scriptures, other than publishing letters, or declarations, collectively?  Will there ever be another time where a Prophet and President, will bring forth a revelation, that uses the writing style that all are accustomed to, found throughout the the Doctrine and Covenants? Meaning, received by the Prophet, be it through a vision, or the words of the Savior, and then become part of the D&C, as directed by the twelve? 

I am sure I am clumsily falling all over my words and thoughts, so I pray for the Grace to be understood as to my overall questions. I have been reading D&C 138, an activity I highly recommend, which has left me wanting more of this kind of writing and revelation. I understand that my comments may be misunderstood, and I know there is much to learn from the words of our leaders today. I just love the (to me) the “poetry”, and the “inspiration”, that I enjoy for from the writings of Bible, Book of Mormon, Doctrine and Covenants, and Pearl of Great Price”, that speaks so deeply to my soul.

This is an unusually long thread for me, so please forgive my many errors that I am sure (know) exist.

Thanks to all who reply,

Your brother...

Bill     

I think canonizing just the relatively few foundational revelations and declarations facilitates study and testimony that will help us recognize and sustain the ongoing revelation that is built upon that. If we are bound to the canon, we are bound as a people and move forward with one heart and mind. This will become more and more essential I think as the gathering of Israel, building of Zion and preparation for the Second Coming hasten, but also hidden to many as a thief in the night.

[JLHPROF]

11 hours ago, teddyaware said:

Anyway, in this day and age we’re way too soft, myopic and fragile to be ready to hear a prophet of the Lord say, “thus sayeth the Lord.” I can assure you that if the leaders ever started saying that again you would hear many members complain nonstop. Even worse, the world would come down on the Church like a ton of bricks with red hot outrage and mockery on steroids.

Amen to that.  If President Nelson were to claim actual words of Christ a good chunk of the members wouldn't believe it actually happened, even if they agreed with the message.

[JAHS]

10 hours ago, Robert F. Smith said:

Official, major revelations nearly always come in answer to a question or need.  Could it be that we haven't had any pressing needs lately?  If we were to have a new revelation, what would it most likely cover?

Perhaps the ordinance pertaining to resurrection?

[Robert F. Smith]

8 hours ago, JustAnAustralian said:

You just need to look at what happened in 2015 for a recent incidence of that.

Yeh, it got pretty ugly at SLC airport just recently, and continued onboard the flight to DC.  https://kutv.com/news/local/video-mitt-romney-called-traitor-on-flight-from-salt-lake-to-dc

[Robert F. Smith]

33 minutes ago, JLHPROF said:

Amen to that.  If President Nelson were to claim actual words of Christ a good chunk of the members wouldn't believe it actually happened, even if they agreed with the message.

Well, how many is a "good chunk"?  There will always be apostates.  That is to be expected.

[CV75]

3 hours ago, teddyaware said:

Refresh my memory as I’m not sure to what you’re referring?

This would be the policy that same-sex marriage is apostasy and set up restrictions on membership for children of parents in a same-sex relationship. It was changed in 2019 for the purposes of Church discipline to focus more on immoral conduct than apostasy, and to establish a working relationship between the congregation, couple and their children so that the restrictions on children could be removed. Sometimes the revelatory keys are not well received, and ongoing revelation is not accepted as such.

[JLHPROF]

55 minutes ago, Robert F. Smith said:

Well, how many is a "good chunk"?  There will always be apostates.  That is to be expected.

Not talking Apostasy.  Skepticism of anything supernatural and by extension spiritual is run amok in our scientific world.  Even among the general membership.  

You only have to look at the faithful members who cast doubt on everything from the flood to the historicity of scripture.  From the first vision, seer stones, to Adam and Eve.  The Book of Abraham to the true order of prayer.  Garments to canonized revelations like 132.  All gave faithful members who question their validity.

A new revelation in the first person voice of God would not be a generally accepted by members as in the days of the Prophet Joseph.

[JLHPROF]

1 hour ago, JAHS said:

Perhaps the ordinance pertaining to resurrection?

That has already been revealed to a good extent in the temple.  Besides, what need would we have for that in this life?  Only a resurrected being can resurrect someone.

[Robert F. Smith]

12 minutes ago, JLHPROF said:

Not talking Apostasy.  Skepticism of anything supernatural and by extension spiritual is run amok in our scientific world.  Even among the general membership.  

You only have to look at the faithful members who cast doubt on everything from the flood to the historicity of scripture.  From the first vision, seer stones, to Adam and Eve.  The Book of Abraham to the true order of prayer.  Garments to canonized revelations like 132.  All gave faithful members who question their validity.

A new revelation in the first person voice of God would not be a generally accepted by members as in the days of the Prophet Joseph.

That is why I asked pointedly about what that "chunk" was, and you didn't quantify it.  Now you say "not ...generally accepted," which sounds like a majority.

Would it make a difference to you if the revelation was an easy one, or a hard one?  For example, the 1978 revelation was readily accepted by the vast majority of LDS members worldwide as an actual revelation from God.  Are you denying that reception history?

Another example:  Suppose a direct revelation commanded the immediate resumption of polygyny among the Saints.  Would a majority of members decline to accept that because it would be too hard to put into practice, or because they disbelieved it?  Or both?

Another bone to pick:  You raised the specter of "supernatural" above.  However, are you aware that formal LDS theology rejects the supernatural?  General members may not know that, and may assume that their anti-supernatural skepticism is based on a knowledge of LDS theology -- which it is not.

[theplains]

12 hours ago, teddyaware said:

No, as far as I know none of the revelations Joseph Fielding Smith spoke of have been revealed to the members at large.

I’m sure you remember President Nelson has been testifying to the members of late that the time has come for the members to, as it were, become their own prophets and not to look for General Authorities to spoon feed them the will of the Lord any longer. At this point, many members are going to have to receive their own personal revelation because the truth is too controversial and/or dangerous for the leaders to state publicly. The Church leaders will still teach us by continuous revelation as much as they’re able, but we’re now going to have to learn much of what we need to know from the Lord on our own through personal revelation.

Boyd K. Packer said it well - "It isn’t a question of who said it or when; the question is whether it is
true" (1977, Follow the Rule, speeches.byu.edu).

[teddyaware]

3 minutes ago, theplains said:

Boyd K. Packer said it well - "It isn’t a question of who said it or when; the question is whether it is
true" (1977, Follow the Rule, speeches.byu.edu).

That’s exactly right. Latter-Day Saints who have the Spirit of revelation know when something is of God and when it isn’t without having to have the prophets say, “thus saith the Lord.” When the prophets of God end their General Conference addresses in the name of the Lord Jesus Christ, for those Church members who have it confirmed upon their souls by the Spirit of revelation that the prophets did indeed speak the truth of God, no other declaration of divine power and authority is necessary.

[JLHPROF]

33 minutes ago, Robert F. Smith said:

That is why I asked pointedly about what that "chunk" was, and you didn't quantify it.  Now you say "not ...generally accepted," which sounds like a majority.

Would it make a difference to you if the revelation was an easy one, or a hard one?  For example, the 1978 revelation was readily accepted by the vast majority of LDS members worldwide as an actual revelation from God.  Are you denying that reception history?

That is a perfect example, a revelation not by the voice of God but announced by his prophet.  No uncomfortable claims of actual words from God's lips.

[CV75]

17 minutes ago, JLHPROF said:

That is a perfect example, a revelation not by the voice of God but announced by his prophet.  No uncomfortable claims of actual words from God's lips.

What revelation have you received that came in the form of actual words from God's lips?

[JLHPROF]

20 minutes ago, CV75 said:

What revelation have you received that came in the form of actual words from God's lips?

I have heard first person words of the Lord.   At one time the answer I received addressed me as "my son".   Many have, much as the revelation the D&C.  You probably have too.

Our leaders simply don't declare the word of the Lord in that format any longer.  I am merely theorizing that the general membership may no longer be as accepting of that format.

Edited January 16, 2021 by JLHPROF

[Robert F. Smith]

29 minutes ago, JLHPROF said:

That is a perfect example, a revelation not by the voice of God but announced by his prophet.  No uncomfortable claims of actual words from God's lips.

No, it is not "a perfect example."  You misunderstand what occurred. The 1978 revelation was never published, and not announced by his prophet.  Only an official declaration about it from the First Presidency.  There is more than one description of what took place in the meeting of the First Pres and Twelve, which was apparently an extraordinary revelatory event, but that was preceded by a personal revelation from God directly to Pres Kimball in the Salt Lake Temple.  None of us are privy to that event.  In other words, we have a series of revelatory events, culminating in a dry official declaration -- which you mistake for the original event.