Related Information to The Mormon Prophet Said So, Is That Enough?

The Mormon Prophet Said So, Is That Enough? - Page 20

We should not forget, The Scriptures were written by the "living Prophets" of their day. Why are these words that have been codified and written down any more valid then words written down today.

Why are prophets of the Old and New Testament, Book of Mormon, and The Doctrine and Covenants more valid then the Prophets of the Post Joseph Smith era and the current Prophet?

I think we are both Fortunate and Unfortunate that every word, syllable, and sentence spoken by modern day Apostles and Prophets since the days of Joseph Smith have been written down and treated as Pure Doctrine. Could the Apostles and prophets of Jesus' Day (considering their ignorance of Jesus' mission) withstood the constant examination of every opinion, word, and utterance that they spoke, without finding some inconsistencies in these statements? Heck, we can find apparent inconsistencies in Paul's writings concerning faith and works. I am sure that if they were examined as closely as Joseph Smith or Brigham Young's words are (many of which have been transcribed or attributed to him by a third party), they would would have been misinterpreted or even expressed an opinion that was not entirely correct.

How much of what we believe, is based on an opinion of an apostle or Prophet who was discussing a personal opinion that may or may not have been correct. I believe every man of God holds beliefs that are incorrect, strictly due to the fact that they are influenced by society, as well as well as our irritatingly limited ability to process the pure information given to us by God? Every man has these limitations (even Joseph Smith), even men who are called of God to witness for his name.

Enough That So Prophet Mormon The

In my post on August 16, I gave a very few quotes about this specific subject, about how if we insist on "following" a Prophet, we can be led to hell.

If a Prophet is speaking for the Lord, then we should pay particular attention. The problem is that you will be very hard pressed to find an instance in over 100 years where a President of the Church has stated that he is speaking for the Lord. If anyone asks for an example of a specific revelation from President Monson, they will be flippantly answered that President Monson received revelation "last Thursday" (referring to the First Presidency meetings on Thursday afternoons).

Even more flippantly, we are told that we can comfortably read the Prophet's General Conference addresses and "know" that they are as good as scripture.

However, if we look back to our written scriptures, we will see that these "dead" Prophets recorded their experiences, visions, and revelations. They chose what was special, what had to do directly with God and His revelations. Those are the scriptures.

Now, we take every statement of opinion, every personal story, every trivial experience of the Prophet and treat it like scripture. We use an impossible standard of "he will never lead us astray." Then we think that we can follow him, a human, into the Celestial Kingdom.

We have a very pure source of doctrine in Joseph Smith. He wasn't perfect. He made mistakes. Some of the things he believed and taught in the early days are contradicted by some of the things he believed and taught in the latter days of his life. He learned line upon line, precept upon precept.

After Joseph Smith came some men who learned directly from him. They attended the School of Prophets. They shared experiences such as having God the Father and Jesus Christ walk among them. They learned from Joseph Smith what the New and Everlasting Covenant of Marriage was all about. Some of them saw Father Adam and Mother Eve. They had angelic ministers.

After Joseph's death, Brigham Young led the church. He stated that one of his great fears was that the people would follow him, trust in the arm of flesh, and fail to live up to their potentials. He taught in the name of the Lord. He was supported by other men who had learned directly from Joseph Smith. He had Heber C. Kimball at his right hand. This was a man who proved to have the spirit of prophecy, among many other strong spiritual gifts.

Following him, John Taylor, Wilford Woodruff, and Lorenzo Snow continued to lead the Church. All of these men had also learned directly from the Prophet. All of them also taught, speaking for the Lord.

Joseph F. Smith was the first who had not received extensive training from the Prophet Joseph. However, he had listened and participated fully with those who had received such training. He spoke for the Lord, although it apparently was rather seldom.

Then came Heber J. Grant. He had been opposed to plural marriage at times, and had reluctantly took a second wife. Apparently he once publicly stated that the "heavens are as brass to me." (I do not have a source for this, but have read it second hand several times.) He, and subsequent Prophets rarely, if ever, stated that they were speaking for the Lord on particular subjects. None of them received training directly from Joseph Smith.

Anyway, the gist of this is that I still cannot find anyplace in scripture, either modern or ancient, that even suggests that we should "follow the Prophet" without serious prayer and personal revelation. Again, if the Prophet says that he is specifically speaking for the Lord, then we should pay particularly close attention. If he is relaying a vision or specific revelation, then we should pay particularly close attention. Yet we should still get confirmation for ourselves. To do otherwise is to rely on the arm of flesh.

The Mormon Prophet Said So, Is That Enough? Studies Doctrine Mormon

I can find nothing in your last post Nighthawk that I can disagree with. I do believe, like you, that if we rely on the spirit to guide us we are less likely to be deceived (though I do not rule out, due to our own weaknesses, misinterpreting the promptings that we receive from God.)

I think it is important to find balance. We need to reflect on the Scriptures (words of Prophets who were once living oracles,) and contemplate what the living oracles of God are trying to tell us concerning the moving of the work today, and we should seriously consider council from those who has stewardship over us (parents, Bishops, leaders). These are all imperfect tools provided to us, to prepare us to receive unfiltered council from God thought the instrument of the Holy Spirit.

I do not believe however that the Spirit can or will work in a vacuum. Without correct information (even if it is limited), written down, or taught to us by parents or other duly appointed stewards, there seems little opportunity for our minds to be prepared for the spirit to teach us. Without being taught by others initially, we would be as the people who lived during the worst times of the Great apostasy, or as the nephites in their worst times of depravity.

The lord provides Prophets and Scriptures (though limited by language and cultural influences) as a preparatory tool to help us to commune directly with God. I believe, and it seems history has proven this right, that without these tools, God's Spirit cannot dwell with men for any extended length of time.

We have the unique privilege of being in the sunlight today, with much knowledge of the Lord at our fingertips and with full access to the Holy Spirit. I do not believe that sunlight would be as bright or even could shine in our own lives, without access to the council and direction of Scriptures and access to "those who are in authority" who "preach the Gospel and administer in the ordinances thereof"
"namely apostles, prophets, pastors, teachers, evangelists, and so forth."

Page 20 Enough That So Prophet Mormon The

I ran across some quotes today.

So, here we have a Prophet giving us specific instruction concerning how closely we follow the Prophet. We later have Prophets telling us, in effect, to completely ignore what the previous Prophet taught. I wonder which one is more reliable. Could it be the one who tells us to rely on God alone? Or is it the one who tells us that we can trust him in all things?

Enough That So Prophet Mormon The

I was checking a link someone provided in another thread from an Institute Manual and I found the following "affirmations" concerning Prophets. You can open each link for the explanation, I am just adding the titles that happen to be affirmations. Please share your thoughts.

Source 6

The Mormon Prophet Said So, Is That Enough?

I have various thoughts about the list below but let's discuss number 9:

The explanation from the same link reads:

1. What are your thoughts about the connection between sustaining the Prophet and sustaining your local leaders? And if you do not sustain your local leaders then you cannot sustain the Prophet.

2. What about if you was absent the day that a particular leader was called and you did not sustain him? What about if you was present but decided not to raise your hand?

The Mormon Prophet So That Enough - Page 20

Those are excellent questions.

Since I have been in the situation where our bishop actually damaged our family, I cannot see how I could, in good conscience, sustain him. By not sustaining someone who has personally hurt my family, did that mean that I didn't sustain the Prophet? At the time, I did fully sustain the Prophet.

I disagree with President Packer on this subject. I see it simply as another way of saying that we must subject ourselves to Church leadership in all things. And I find that whole concept to be in opposition to the scriptures and the early teachings of the Church. Actually, I find that concept to fit in neatly with the worldly power structures that seek unrighteous dominion over the children of God.

The Mormon Prophet So That Enough Mormon Doctrine Studies - Page 20

Well, I personally have a big problem with Pres. Hinckley statement that local leaders cannot lead you astray (should I make a list of cases?) but the quotes I posted come from the Institute Manual and I just do not agree with several of them.

I have problems with several of those affirmations, yes those are affirmations such as those who oppose or reject the counsel of the Prophet lose the Spirit of the Lord, that Sustain a Prophet Is to Follow That Prophet and The Standard Works and Living Prophets Must Be Accepted or Rejected Together.

Something is not right here. If those affirmations are the official Church position then according to the Church I am going towards the road of apostasy when I think we should not make such affirmations and generalizations like that.