First vision, contemporary copy or 2nd witness?

[_Tobin]

Ah, so you have the view that for something to be true, it must have been unique and never occurred or happened to anyone else. I guess you don't believe that the Sun truly exists since more than one person has experienced that and on a regular basis too (oh my all those copycats out there).

The Sun? I see that everyday. You better come up with a better example than that.

I just did and that shows that your view is false that copycat experiences (duplicating an experience) invalidates that experience or means it is false. If you'd like to concede your position that something has to be unique to be true is ridiculous, I'm ok with that.

[_Hades]

I just did and that shows that your view that copycat experiences (duplicating an experience) does not invalidate that experience or mean it is false. If you'd like to concede your position that something has to be unique to be true is ridiculous, I'm ok with that.

I concede. Joe Smith ripping off others is a sign that he was a true prophet. I see the light. I shall repent.

[_Tobin]

I just did and that shows that your view that copycat experiences (duplicating an experience) does not invalidate that experience or mean it is false. If you'd like to concede your position that something has to be unique to be true is ridiculous, I'm ok with that.

I concede. Joe Smith ripping off others is a sign that he was a true prophet. I see the light. I shall repent.

Even though you are trying to be facetious, I'll accept that. Joseph Smith was not the first, nor will he be the last to "see the light", or in other words, experience God.

[_Hades]

Even though you are trying to be facetious, I'll accept that. Joseph Smith was not the first, nor will he be the last to "see the light", or in other words, experience God.

Haha, I was never separate from God, nor will I ever be. God is inside us all. He was inside the fine bourbon I sipped earlier. He told me, "Don't follow Joe Smith's dogma, and don't give him your money. Joe was a seeker of fame, fortune and power."

[_RockSlider]

I think as a Mormon, we should seek and endorse the truth. I hardly think Joseph Smith had all the truth or that Mormonism itself contains everything that is true. I also believe if you are really interested in the truth, there is no better way than learning the truth directly from God.

I personally sought the "Mystic Mormon path for many a moon. I fully understand what you are promoting.
I'm sorry I have not followed you real close ... so forgive these questions:

Do you consider yourself an active TBM (i.e. TR holder, go to all three meetings every Sunday, attend the Temple etc)?
Do some TBM's consider you an apostate?
If you have been at this pre 2000, have you had any Church discipline?

[_Tobin]

I think as a Mormon, we should seek and endorse the truth. I hardly think Joseph Smith had all the truth or that Mormonism itself contains everything that is true. I also believe if you are really interested in the truth, there is no better way than learning the truth directly from God.

I personally sought the "Mystic Mormon path for many a moon. I fully understand what you are promoting.
I'm sorry I have not followed you real close ... so forgive these questions:

Do you consider yourself an active TBM (i.e. TR holder, go to all three meetings every Sunday, attend the Temple etc)?

I attend Sacrament meeting and believe the sacrament is important. I on rare occasions attend GD and other meetings. I have been endowed, have served in sealing groups and so on, but do not presently attend the temple because I do not believe the practice is pure (and to a degree is done in solemn mockery of God unintentionally).

Do some TBM's consider you an apostate?

Sure, but I've had many chats with TBMs and I've rarely seen many disagree about the importance of gaining a personal witness of Jesus Christ for oneself, much as Paul and others did.

If you have been at this pre 2000, have you had any Church discipline?

I served a mission and left becoming an atheist. I came back to Mormonism after having an experience with God, which changed my view about that topic around 2000.

[_RockSlider]

Tobin;

Thank you ...

so as I stated before:

"because as a whole it just does not happen, the people do not seek personal revelation and only a very small few, who tend to be considered apostate by the main body claim to have had such."

Sure active TBM's will give this concept lip service, but anyone I know who has actually persued this course have trodden a course through Hell and are apostate or strangers, silent and lonely among the flock.

I'm not sure I would recommend this course of action, only to a select few

[_Themis]

I also don't know why some continue to trot this stupidity out again and again that Mormons and others should go to God for their own revelation that what is being taught is true ... because as a whole it just does not happen, the people do not seek personal revelation and only a very small few, who tend to be considered apostate by the main body claim to have had such.

I think this is incorrect. The church teaches one should seek personal revelation, and most active members I know do just that. The church has never taught from Joseph Smith on down that angels or God should be an expectation or a necessity in getting revelation, but they don't say it won't happen either. The problem is that these experiences are generated in the mind, and so one interprets feelings and thoughts as being the HG and therefore revelation. To have better experiences that involve thinking one is seeing or hearing things is harder for most people, so most never have them. Most of those that do tend to have issues in life.

[_RockSlider]

I think this is incorrect. The church teaches one should seek personal revelation, and most active members I know do just that.

please explain how most active members go about this, and how they then receive this revelation. I'm looking for a bit more detail than what the church teaches ... well just study, ponder and pray.

The church has never taught from Joseph Smith on down that angels or God should be an expectation or a necessity in getting revelation, but they don't say it won't happen either.

I read all of BHR's volumes of the History of the Church. I read endless examples of administrations of angels, right up to the members of the School of the Prophets seeing Christ in one of their sessions. D&C 84, oath and covenant of the Priesthood states that the expected fruits of the aaronic priesthood is the administration of angels and that the fruits of the Melchezdic are a knowledge of the mysteries of godliness and knowledge of the Kingdom of God. And we were taugh over and over that nothing that Joseph Smith or our GA's have should not be enjoyed by us ... that we also should be prophets seers and revelators. So I would have to disagree with your statement here.

The problem is that these experiences are generated in the mind, and so one interprets feelings and thoughts as being the HG and therefore revelation. To have better experiences that involve thinking one is seeing or hearing things is harder for most people, so most never have them. Most of those that do tend to have issues in life.

And that is the problem with trying to obtain the promised level of prophet/seer/revelator for ones self. A simple study/ponder/pray does not cut it, but a long hard journey of learning about yourself and how to receive revelation is when the journey through hell starts. I believe that this journey is/was also about one's seeking their calling and election ... it takes this level of desire/work and it will alienate one quickly from his/her piers

[_Themis]

please explain how most active members go about this, and how they then receive this revelation. I'm looking for a bit more detail than what the church teaches ... well just study, ponder and pray.

Why would you need more then that? Read ponder and pray are the basics of what the church teaches, and that the HG will be the one to convey personal revelation, although they don't limit it to the HG.

I read all of BHR's volumes of the History of the Church. I read endless examples of administrations of angels, right up to the members of the School of the Prophets seeing Christ in one of their sessions. D&C 84, oath and covenant of the Priesthood states that the expected fruits of the aaronic priesthood is the administration of angels and that the fruits of the Melchezdic are a knowledge of the mysteries of godliness and knowledge of the Kingdom of God. And we were taugh over and over that nothing that Joseph Smith or our GA's have should not be enjoyed by us ... that we also should be prophets seers and revelators. So I would have to disagree with your statement here.

I don't disagree with what you say above. I only stated that they don't make God, Jesus, or angels showing up a necessity as Tobin wants to think.

And that is the problem with trying to obtain the promised level of prophet/seer/revelator for ones self. A simple study/ponder/pray does not cut it, but a long hard journey of learning about yourself and how to receive revelation is when the journey through hell starts. I believe that this journey is/was also about one's seeking their calling and election ... it takes this level of desire/work and it will alienate one quickly from his/her piers

I understand what you are getting at, and yes they teach that one needs to see Jesus in order to get your C&E, and also do a lot of work to get there. I would agree that the more we put into that effort will get some have their bodies produce more intense experiences. Most tend to become a problem for the church. Depending on how much they talk about it will determine what kind of relationship they will have with the church.