- This topic is empty.
-
Posts
-
Quote:
“The prophet is not limited by men’s reasoning. …
”
Discuss.Since cwald has noticed that the women are not commenting quite so much, I’ll take a stab at this one. A prophet, in my mind, should study things out, consulting experts, researching the ideas of others, and try to get an understanding of the issue. He ought to discuss things with the other apostles but in the end, a prophet by definition is not limited by his intellect because he has access to the spirit. Now, I personally don’t believe that our prophet has any more access to the gifts of the spirit than the average human being but I do believe that none of us are limited by the reasoning of men. We are spiritual beings and can be taught by spirit.
This doesn’t mean that the prophet needs to disregard what human beings have learned because he can be taught by the spirit. I wish that BKP would have tried to open his mind to the issue of homosexuality. If he had done some scientific research and used his intellect, he might not have made the statements he did last conference.
Well cwald, how did I do?
🙂 I composed this post whilst chatting with dh. A woman is always multitasking
CG
I can see that two ways. First of all a prophet can see beyond the reasoning of men and have spiritual insight. Maybe this is the case but if it is we should see the great benefits of his insight. On the other hand my empirical mind says this is just an excuse to be able to overrider human reasoning when it conflicts with current belief or dogma. Take something as simple as the WoW. Current reasoning or evidence is a little alcohol in extreme moderation is good for you, but it is overridden by the prophet who says it is all bad. Add homosexuality, dress codes, and a bunch of other items to the list and it looks like human reasoning is always subject to the last word from the prophet. That fundamental sounds like a very arrogant statement to me. It shucks out the “study it out in your mind” principle that is canonized in the scriptures, and in isolation, sounds like a return to the lemming mentality that puts so many people off. IX-NAY on that one.
[However, this does NOT mean I won’t consider and pray about statements from the prophet even if they seem to conflict with reason. I will definitely consider them. As someone with strong ideation, I love new and bizarre ideas. But eventually, they have to make sense in a practical way if I’m going to act on them]
canadiangirl wrote:Since cwald has noticed that the women are not commenting quite so much, I’ll take a stab at this one.
Well cwald, how did I do?
🙂 I composed this post whilst chatting with dh. A woman is always multitaskingVery well said.
:clap: If a prophet is not limited by men’s reasoning and can speak on any matter, including civic and social issues (F9 I think) then here are some questions we should have answers to. I mean, we have been told not to wear two sets of earrings and not watch R-rated movies, trivial commandments IMO, yet the prophets are silent on issues like: When does life begin
If homosexuality is genetic caused
If the Iraqi war is justified
The future of alternative energy sources
Will we live polygamy in the CK (“God will sort it out.” please.)
Why was polygamy and polyandry okay in JS time, but now “chasity” is next to murder in sin level, and as late as the 80’s the church even tries to control sex within married couple relationships between one man and one woman.
When we should demonstrate our objections to government with civil disobedience
How did the earth get created
When did the earth get created
Why only .01% of the earth population is blessed with the ONE TRUE RESTORED GOSPEL
Is the death penalty humane and justified
Is the EPA helping or hurting the planet
Is the NCAAP a good organization or a bad organization, and are they doing more good or harm to the unity of the country
etc, etc, etc
I guess I’m kind of agreeing with Spock and taking it a step further.
I know there are others, but I got to go to Branch Conference.
If the prophet was working a miracle or dictating revelation (real revelation, not policy) then I can see this taking some effect, IF AND ONLY IF he is truly speaking for God. ALL ELSE….. fail.
On the continuum from benign to malignant, I’m going to put this on the M is for Malignantend of the 14 fundamentals. This fundamental is an abomination in the sight of Heaven because it draws a line of enmity and pride (a false division, dichotomy, or divide) between “Our Man” and “All The Rest”. To put it crassly, as LeFou (Gaston’s sidekick in Disney’s Beauty and the Beast) sings, “Gaston is the best and the rest is all drips.” On the one hand you have Our Man whose word is revelation from heaven. On the other hand you have Pope Benedict, the Dalai Lama, Adyashanti, Eckhart Tolle, and 7 billion others including you and me whose word is “men’s reasoning”.
This fundamental is an abomination in the sight of humanity because it places Our Man above the most noble institutions and achievements of his peers. It places him above the law, above the morality, above the beauty, and above the spirituality.
This fundamental is sick, backward, provincial, and unworthy of a global people.
On the other hand, speaking mystically… This fundamental is symbolic of the knowledge of my inner prophet that is higher, deeper, larger, and beyond any possible access of the reasoning the man of my mind can muster or conceive. The man’s reasoning is limited; the prophet’s knowledge is not. I am the Prophet; and I need not be limited by the Reasoning Man in my head.
I am the Prophet. I am Tom Haws. I am Tom Monson. I am the Dalai Lama. I am Barack Obama. I am cwald. I am canadian girl. I am Ray. I am Brian. I am the Pope. I am in all and through all. I am without beginning of days or ending of years. I am without boundary. I Am That I Am.
Tom – I think your entire “double post” is quite brilliant. Very good. I +1 it.
“The prophet is not limited by men’s reasoning. I used to believe this. However, the more I learn about the non white-washed church history, the more I would say that each and every latter-day prophet has demonstrated beyond any reasonable doubt that he
hasbeen limited to “mens reasoning” in fact, they have sounded less “silly” when they have used mens reasoning rather than just using their own (blank)reasoning. IMO f4h1
I agree conceptually with this idea, primarily because I have experienced moments of flashing insight in my own life that have come out of the blue, outside of “man’s reasoning” and with such clarity that I was stunned. Those instances might be classified by others as falling inside “man’s reasoning” – but I can’t put them there, especially in a handful of cases that truly were prophetic. So, while I agree totally that this idea can be and has been abused and misunderstood, I also think it is a wonderful idea if applied liberally to all as prophets.
Iow, what Tom said.
Listen to some of Benson’s commentary on this one: Quote:The prophet is not limited by men’s reasoning.
There will be times when you will have to choose between the revelations of God and the reasoning of men–between the prophet and the politician or professor. Said the Prophet Joseph Smith, “Whatever God requires is right, no matter what it is, although we may not see the reason thereof until long after the events transpire That sounds great in theory but show me one example where any of these LDS prophets’ special wisdom or insight has been clearly superior to men’s reasoning after the fact. The problem is that I can think of many examples that suggest that these prophets are very much limited to men’s reasoning most of the time. In fact, it looks like they are limited even more than average by the additional constraints of having to start out with the idea that the Church’s official story and all these supposed revelations mostly written before 1844 are all true at the same time and then work from there. Seriously, does the GBH counsel to wear only one pair of earrings really sound like something Jesus would say or does it sound more like something many old-school conservatives would probably think of entirely on their own?
I think if I were to reword it, I would say: Quote:Prophecy is not limited to human reasoning.
I would MUCH rather put prophecy outside of human reasoning than to put “the prophet” outside of it.
But that’s not what it says Ray…
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.