Revelation, Inspiration, and Opinion....

[_msnobody]

But if the prophets themselves can't figure out what is or is not inspired what chance has the ordinary person?

False prophets don't seek wisdom from God. Ahtogh they claim to speak for God, they do not speak for Him.

[_Gazelam]

Jersey,

The prophets are held to the same standard that you and I are. They are called to be prophets because they have shown themselves to bear the name of Christ in an honorable way. They have shown themselves trustworthy.

Honestly there are probably better living Christians among general congregations, but they are not called by God because he needs them where they are. We all have our place and our trials we are asked to bear, some because they are the lessons we need, and others because we provide support for someone elses trials.

The gospel isn't intended to be broken down into individual commandments and answers for every given situation, its an attitude and a disposition of carrying the spirit with you.

If it must be broken down, then the questions asked in the temple recommend interview is a fair guide, or as I like to think of it, a way of sticking ones spiritual finger in the air to judge the atmosphere your walking in.

Gaz

[_Jersey Girl]

Jersey,

The prophets are held to the same standard that you and I are. They are called to be prophets because they have shown themselves to bear the name of Christ in an honorable way. They have shown themselves trustworthy.

You still refuse to answer the question that i asked you.

Honestly there are probably better living Christians among general congregations, but they are not called by God because he needs them where they are. We all have our place and our trials we are asked to bear, some because they are the lessons we need, and others because we provide support for someone elses trials.

You still refuse to answer the question that I asked you.

The gospel isn't intended to be broken down into individual commandments and answers for every given situation, its an attitude and a disposition of carrying the spirit with you.

What has the gospel got to do with the question that I asked you?

If it must be broken down, then the questions asked in the temple recommend interview is a fair guide, or as I like to think of it, a way of sticking ones spiritual finger in the air to judge the atmosphere your walking in.

Gaz

What has the gospel, the breaking down of the gospel, the temple recommend interview or one's spiritual finger got to do with the question that I asked you? Why do you appear to have such difficulty answering one simple question?

[_truth dancer]

Every single word out of the prophet's mouth is not revelation, true, or doctrine.

I get this.

Ok. Is this a problem?

I get that there is little if any official doctrine, that scripture can be altered, changed, reinterpreted, revised, discarded, and eliminated.

I understand you point and in part you may be correct. But I do not think it is as simplistic as you make it sound. Can you give some examples of this in practice? I know a few and it was not a simple process.

Removal of sec 101, removal of lectures on faith, change of the temple ceremony, temple oaths and covenants, change of wording, washing and annointing stuff, etc. etc. etc. etc. etc. etc. etc. etc. etc.

The problem however is that leaders continuously speak as prophets seers, and revelators, representing the one true church of God, and get things REALLY wrong.

This could be interesting to discuss if you would provide some examples.

Think Seven heresies... Think SWK and the Native Americans... Think Adam God, I could go on and on and on here...

Does anyone else wonder, if these men who claim to commune with God, who claim to have the keys given to them as seers and revelators, who supposedly represent Jesus Christ on earth cannot figure out what is or is not inspired, why do other regular men and women think THEY can figure out what God is trying to tell them.

If these men can't seem to figure out what is or is not true, why should they be trusted or relied upon for information or insight?

Yes it does seem that the process of revelation and inspiration can be messier then we are led to think it is in the simple level one belief in the Church. I was discussing this with my daughter today in fact. I have some ideas to share about it but I am interested in your examples first.

I would love to hear them. My point is really about how, if PROPHETS can get things wrong when they think they are inspired, why do others think inspiration works.

Forget about official doctrine for a minute... I understand they just speak their opinion

No the sometimes speak opinion and sometimes doctrine. Your characterization is not accurate and much to one dimensional. I understand why you have it. I think it comes from the apologist. And yes, for them, any idea that seems odd or strange that they do not, or cannot explain becomes opinion. But remember, apologists do not run the Church. Apostles do. And THEY DO NOT THINK THAT MOST OF WHAT THEY SAY IS SIMPLY OPINION. Certainly 19th century leaders did not. Nor so I think they think that today. I know ETB and BRM are dead now but they thought what they said meant something. I think the leaders do today as well.

Yes, Jason, I understand the leaders do not think most of what they say is simple opinion. This is exactly my point. They think they are speaking truth but alas, it turns out they are so often wrong. If prophets think they are inspired but clearly aren't in many cases (some big ones in my opinion), what about the average person who does not have prophetic keys, does not speak face to face with Christ in the holy of holies, who is not called as a seer and revelator?

but is it too much to assume that before speaking as a prophet, or representing Jesus Christ they didn't at the very least ask for inspiration?

If the prophets and leaders of the church can't figure out what is or is not inspiration, seems to me the average person who claims to have this gift may want to reconsider what they think is a personal revelation.

I think that the leaders would not agree with what you paint here.

Of course they wouldn't. They think they are inspired and speaking God's will. (Well sometimes I think they know otherwise but that is just my opionion... smile). The problem is, they THINK they are indeed inspired but are obviously either NOT inspired or the HG is telling them something REALLY incorrect. (I do not believe in the HG but I'm going with the LDS paradigm here).

:-)

~dancer~

[_ludwigm]

...
Joseph Smith recorded that he "visited with a brother and sister in Michigan, who thought that a prophet is always a prophet', but I told them that a prophet was a prophet only when he was actign as such." (Teachings, p.278.)
...

And Brigham Young said
"I have never yet preached a sermon and sent it out to the children of men, that they may not call Scripture."
(JofD: LATTER-DAY SAINT FAMILIES-PREACHING THE GOSPEL-BUILDING UP THE KINGDOM
REMARKS BY PRESIDENT BRIGHAM YOUNG, DELIVERED IN THE TABERNACLE, SALT LAKE CITY, JANUARY 2, 1870.
Reported by John Grimshaw.13:87)
...

President Joseph Fielding Smith has said: "it makes no difference what is written or what anyone has said, if what has been said is in conflict with what the Lord has revealed, we can set it aside. My words, and the teachings of any other member of the Church, high or low, if they do not square with the revelations, we need not accept them. ..."

Which is valid?

And I say
I have never yet heared or read from any prophet's mouth: "I am not a prophet NOW, I tell only my personal opinion NOW"
Prophets write and preach, and later, after decades, come the others, the answering machines, with explanations.
Nobody says : "The prophet (apostle, seventy etc) told us this or that yesterday, even in conference talk - and he was wrong, he said his opinion against scriptures."

President Joseph Fielding Smith has said (above): " ... we can set it aside ... "
Who are that "WE", who can set aside anything said by the Lord's Anointed the very moment?

[_Inconceivable]

Deuteronomy

18:20 But the prophet, which shall presume to speak a word in my name, which I have not commanded him to speak, or that shall speak in the name of other gods, even that prophet shall die.

Now there's a standard that ended after the church was liberated of Joseph Smith.


Where is the consistancy?

[_Inconceivable]

Thankyou for the thread, TD.

I was taught that the prophet presents revelations from the one and only God of heaven that will benefit not just members of God's only real church, but the entire world. In other words, he will convey a message from God that sets standards of righteousness that transcend national culture, trends or public opinion.

Grant Palmer poses this:

Whether he spoke as a prophet or as a mere man, he has committed himself, for he has said what is not true. If he spoke as a prophet, therefore, he is a false prophet. If he spoke as a mere man, he cannot be trusted, for he spoke positively and like an oracle respecting that of which he knew nothing. (Grant H. Palmer, “An insider’s View of Mormon Origins”, pp 34-36)