DiscussMormonism.com

This past Sunday was a funny one for me.

Apparently the Relief Society/Priesthood lesson was on the importance of modern day prophets, or something similar. One of the questions the teacher asked in an attempt to get dialogue going was, "What important things has our current prophet taught?" My wife said the room was completely silent and no one said anything. Sensing she wasn't going to get any answers, the teacher then asked "What have recent prophets taught that was important?" At that point people started contributing, though my wife said that some of the answers weren't very good.

So, Thomas S. Monson has been prophet for over 4 years at this point. And yet, no one in my wife's class could name a single thing he has taught. If he doesn't say anything for 4 years, it seems to me that having a prophet isn't all that important. If having modern day revelation is so important, why in the course of 4 years has not Monson said anything other than that which you can read in an average "Chicken Soup for the Soul" book?

Clearly, the members of your ward don't spend enough time at mormonnewsroom.org or they would be aware of President Newsroom's recent pronouncements.

When is the last time a conference talk had a theological tone?
Who was the last apostle theologian? (McConkie?)
How many apostles are lawyers?

I think Chruch leadership is a lot more concerned about the business of the Church then the theology of the Church.

By the way the public stand on Gay marriage seems to be an exception to all this, though even that stance is quickly becoming the realm of President Newsroom B. Release.

GBH said it...we don't need much revelation anymore.

I thought Monson was replaced with President Newsroom.

Buffalo wrote:I thought Monson was replaced with President Newsroom.

You can't spell Prophet without PR...

Monson is keeping his head down after:
Gaygate
BaptismGate
PattonGate
CityCreekGate
BlackGate
ApostasyGate
JanitorGate

He has presided over the most shambolic period the Church has ever had.
His first words at the next General Conference should be ''I'm sorry'' closely followed by ''I resign''.

just me wrote:GBH said it...we don't need much revelation anymore.

Exactly. The role of the prophet isn't as important as it was in the days of Joseph Smith when revelations came in fast and furious. Now they trickle in every 10-20 years or so. Today's prophet is more of a symbolic figure head, like the Queen of England. The real doctrines and policies come from the LDS Newsroom and the BYU intellectuals. They are like the parliament.

DarkHelmet wrote:

just me wrote:GBH said it...we don't need much revelation anymore.

Exactly. The role of the prophet isn't as important as it was in the days of Joseph Smith when revelations came in fast and furious. Now they trickle in every 10-20 years or so. Today's prophet is more of a symbolic figure head, like the Queen of England. The real doctrines and policies come from the LDS Newsroom and the BYU intellectuals. They are like the parliament.

But...in other news...Prophets are more important to us than the scriptures...apparently.

It's confusing when Apostles and Prophets don't stay on message.

"I have never pretended to nor do I profess to have received revelations. I never said that I had a revelation except so far as God has shown me that so-called Mormonism is God's divine truth, that is all." - Joseph F. Smith, trendsetter

So, Thomas S. Monson has been prophet for over 4 years at this point. And yet, no one in my wife's class could name a single thing he has taught. If he doesn't say anything for 4 years, it seems to me that having a prophet isn't all that important. If having modern day revelation is so important, why in the course of 4 years has not Monson said anything other than that which you can read in an average "Chicken Soup for the Soul" book?

TSM has taught the Gospel as we are to know it which is essentially the definition of prophecy (Rev 19:10)