- This topic is empty.
-
Posts
-
I always think of the story where some kid asked David O. McKay point blank: “Have you seen Jesus?” President McKay with no hesitation replied “No, but I have heard his voice many times.” From that I figure if he could spend all those years as an Apostle before his presidency, and then into his presidency without experiencing what we may term an Apostolic vision — I can’t help but conclude it is not a requirement for the position.
Also, I was recently reading in the journals of Abraham H. Cannon, and he mentions some discussion among the apostles in his time of how Joseph Smith told the first apostles around 1835 that it was their privilege to have a special witness of the savior. The journal entry struck me as a suggestion to both the first group and Cannon’s group that this was something to strive for — meaning several if not most or all of the functioning apostles had not received such a manifestation.
SilentDawning wrote:Why do you think this possible untruth/legend/folklore is allowed to continue in the Church? To be careful not to destroy the faith of the members?
1. Because it’s dangerous business to run around micromanaging the details everyone else’s personal views and beliefs, especially when we’re essentially going to try and replace it with our own flawed views.
2. Because they probably see it as mostly harmless, and certainly helps them run the Church. I don’t think they explicitly promote this folk belief. Sure, some make some vague implications. I understand that.
3. Where do you stop with this responsibility for the “factual” truth? They are business managers of a very large organization. I know the idealistic nature of religion is enticing, but they really aren’t going to undermine the practical power of the organization or jeopardize its survival by making these sacrifices on that altar of idealism. They would be poor stewards if they did.
People who choose to look closely will get it.
Brian Johnston wrote:They are business managers of a very large organization. I know the idealistic nature of religion is enticing, but they really aren’t going to undermine the practical power of the organization or jeopardize its survival by making these sacrifices on that altar of idealism.
So has the church gone astray? Of course it has, from a certain point of view. It went astray the day it was “regularly organized and established agreeable to the laws of our country.” Or maybe it’s our perspective that is wrong. Maybe it’s utter foolishness to equate church/organization/association/corporation with faith/religion. The church is an association, nothing more or less.
Quote:Or maybe it’s our perspective that is wrong.
BINGO – at least, imo.
We expect so much, when, in reality, I believe most of what we expect needs to come from us if it is to be powerful and life-altering. It’s just that what I just said is extremely scary for those who aren’t natural explorers – and, let’s face it, the vast majority of people are settlers, not explorers. Security trumps discovery for most people – and that’s not a bad thing, in and of itself. There has to be a solid foundation that can launch most explorers, even if that foundation doesn’t launch as many explorers as the explorers think they would prefer.
I wonder sometimes if explorers really want everyone else to be explorers (to be like them) or if, perhaps, explorers would find ways still to be explorers (different than the norm) even if everyone else suddenly became like they are presently – but that’s a topic for a different discussion. (If anyone wants to have that discussion, feel free to copy and paste that last sentence as the genesis of a new thread. I think it is an important concept to consider, but it really doesn’t fit this thread – so I don’t want to derail this one by pursuing it here.)
I wanted to chime in on this question – have the Apostles actually seen the Savior? Let me preface my answer with this – In my own encounters with the Lord (no visible visits yet) I have often felt a sweet peace, a comforting embrace or a knowledge that he is very aware of me and my situation. I see the Savior as a kind and loving brother. I have also received great personal knowledge during my prayers, scripture reading and times of deep meditation.
Having said the above, I cannot believe that the Apostles have ever encountered Jesus Christ in the literal sense. Without mocking or being disrespectful, I would hope that men who have encountered the risen Christ would have greater wisdom and spiritual knowledge to impart at General Conference than what currently flows bi-annually. The Apostles are often cold and obsessed with commandments, obedience and “doing more.”
The Apostles of old had their entire lives turned upside down by Christ. The men who lead this Church are old rusty anchors who have long been in the Church system and have, by viture of old age, managed to float to the surface.
Regardless, I do believe that the Spirit of God does impress and work with the leaders of the Church – not in the literal sense that so many faithful Saints believe. I cannot picture Jesus Christ sitting in the “holy of holies” in the SLC Temple chatting with President Monson.
G
Yes (used to) Yes (still do)
No (still don’t)
Do I feel foolish or what?
Well into my forties, I not only believed, but fully expected that all of the 12 had been personally administered to by Jesus Christ (i.e. true second anointing). It was a full reading of the History of the Church that first converted me to a desire to seeking the Face of God.
Go look here for a good read:
http://byustudies2.byu.edu/hc/hcpgs/hc.aspxhttp://byustudies2.byu.edu/hc/hcpgs/hc.aspx” class=”bbcode_url”> See – Volume Two, Chapter 13 Part 1 – General Charge to the Twelve. (the first twelve in this despensation).
Towards the bottom of page 196 note:
“You have been indebted to other men, in the first instance, for evidence; on that you have acted; but it is necessary that you receive a testimony from heaven for yourselves; so that you can bear testimony to the truth of the Book of Mormon, and that you have seen the face of God. That is more than the testimony of an angel. When the proper time arrives, you shall be able to bear this testimony to the world. When you bear testimony that you have seen God, this testimony God will never suffer to fall, but will bear you out; although many will not give heed, yet others will. You will therefore see the necessity of getting this testimony from heaven.
Never cease striving until you have seen God face to face. Strengthen your faith; cast off you doubts, your sins, and all your unbelief; and nothing can prevent you from coming to God. Your ordination is not full and complete till God has laid His hand upon you. We require as much to qualify us as did those who have gone before us; God is the same. If the Savior in former days laid His hands upon His disciples, why not in latter days?”
But then again, I was also foolish enough to fully believe and, based on faithfulness expect the Oath and Covenant of the Priesthood to be available to all that sought:
19And this greater apriesthood administereth the gospel and holdeth the bkey of the cmysteries of the kingdom, even the key of the dknowledge of God.
20Therefore, in the aordinances thereof, the power of bgodliness is manifest.
21And without the ordinances thereof, and the aauthority of the priesthood, the power of godliness is bnot manifest unto men in the flesh;
22For without this no aman can see the face of God, even the Father, and live.
mercyngrace wrote:
Well, in theory anyone with a testimony of Jesus Christ should be able to bear a “prophetic witness”. (Revelations 19:10)
Of course in the case of M&G that would be a Prophetess witness
(rockslider)
timpanogos wrote:mercyngrace wrote:
Well, in theory anyone with a testimony of Jesus Christ should be able to bear a “prophetic witness”. (Revelations 19:10)
Of course in the case of M&G that would be a Prophetess witness
(rockslider)
You are free to refer to me as “Her Holiness”, Rockslider.
😆 😆 😆 (That would certainly invite loud guffaws from my family…)Nice to see you around these parts my dear friend!
timpanogos wrote:Your ordination is not full and complete till God has laid His hand upon you.
So, if this statement is to be accepted, then (depending on the interpretation of the word ordination) either the priesthood is a provisional priesthood or the apostleship is a provisional apostleship. It could be temporary and imperfect, but still be a vehicle or schoolmaster towards divine reconciliation. What if the priesthood was less of an endowment of power and more of an invitation to serve?
Roy, Good point. Even I have often preached that the endowment was not something that was simply given the day you went through for yourself, but was achieved over the long haul of trying to obtain the promises of the Oath and Covenant for one’s self.
Thinking about this, I can see this is part of my problem. I felt I had failed in any hope of obtaining the promise for myself, and yet somehow feel angered in not seeing/feeling that even they may not have achieved it.
Put in another way (more positive light) … They are/were/should be a candle set upon the hill side, for all to see, as an example and guide, saying “come this way!. I’ve seen him, I’m his witness, as can you also be.”
The unfortunate thing about the (realistic) voting I’ve seen in this thread, is that at the same time as our expectations of a prophet in this manner has been downplayed, so have the teachings of one striving for their own calling and election.
And yet again, that’s what messed a lot of my generation up I suppose, so maybe it’s for the best, who knows.
Quote:Good point. Even I have often preached that the endowment was not something that was simply given the day you went through for yourself, but was achieved over the long haul of trying to obtain the promises of the Oath and Covenant for one’s self.
I agree, Timp.
I think there is a holy spirit of PROMISE for these blessings to be endowed upon righteousness. I think many are available to receive that promised blessing.
You would have to ask them I guess. I have seen Jesus though, fairly often I might add. I seen him in service to others, I see him in unconditional love toward the sons and daughters of our Heavenly Father. I see him smile as we speak of his Grace, and pray in his name. I see him in LOVE for that is what he represents to us and suggests we offer up in his Holy Name. It is enough.
“I Come to the Garden Alone, while the dew is still on the heather… and he walks with me and he talks with me and he tells me I am His Own and the joy I know…”
I think President Hinkley gave us a pretty good idea of how the prophets and apostles interact with the godhead when he talked about the revelation of lifting the racial ban on the priesthood. He said they prayed and there was a “good feeling” in the room that left no doubt that the priesthood was available to all worthy men in the church. That is the only revelation that has been announced in my lifetime and it did not involve a visitation. In other words, the apostles have basically the same type of access to God that the rest of us do. Korash
No. No. Yes. When we went to Kirtland about 8 years ago, the missionary guides who were there shared a handout with stories of 9 locations in Kirtland where members – not just apostles – saw the Savior. Were these group hallucinations brought on by too much pipe smoke and not enough ventillation, fasting, sacramental wine? I think we are very dismissive of these things now, but I can’t help but wonder if these kinds of group (and even individual) spiritual manifestations have largely gone away because 1) the wrong people got “promoted” at some point (as happened in Catholicism) or 2) those things were necessary as a foundation only, not after. That is, if you believe they ever did happen in the first place. I’m inclined to take group manifestations more seriously than individual ones.
hawkgrrrl wrote:1) the wrong people got “promoted” at some point (as happened in Catholicism)
Can you expound on this a little more? Who got promoted and what happened in Catholicism?
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.