- This topic is empty.
-
Posts
-
I know that many here would say that the Prophet and his Apostles have NOT seen God. As far as I know, none of the modern prophets and apostles have claimed to though some have strongly hinted at it. This quote is from President Henry Eyring: Quote:I am a witness of the Resurrection of the Lord as surely as if I had been there in the evening with the two disciples in the house on Emmaus road. I know that He lives as surely as did Joseph Smith when he saw the Father and the Son in the light of a brilliant morning in a grove of trees in Palmyra.
His entire talk is here:
https://www.lds.org/general-conference/2013/04/come-unto-me?lang=eng It’s a heartfelt testimony but really doesn’t come out and say that he’s actually seen Christ. So let’s set aside skepticism for a moment and assume that the prophet and apostles have seen God and/or Christ in the same way that Joseph Smith reported seeing them in the Sacred Grove. Why not simply come out and say so? Below is I believe a good example of the typical answer to this question (it comes from a blog called “AskGramps”:
Quote:Now, I must remind you that such an event would clearly be a very sacred one, thus very unlikely to be discussed publicly. There are records of the then current Prophets of the Church seeing the Savior from time to time, but they are desperately rare. Should such events be made public simply because they have happened? I don’t think so. There are special and personal events that have taken place between my wife and me in public places, and with other family. Even those that are not spiritual in nature are events that I keep to myself because of the precious nature of them. They are dear to my heart and to tell them to the world lessens their value to me. Were I granted such an opportunity to see my Savior, I would hardly think to tell anyone outside my home, much less the world at large.
My response is that if the interaction is personal, naturally, you would be reluctant to share it. But if you are receiving counsel and revelation for the entire Church, why not come out and say so directly? Joseph Smith DID tell the world at large about his experiences and nearly the entire Doctrine and Covenants is based on the assumption that Joseph Smith was having regular interaction with God (in some form). I just wondered if people could come up with other reasons why the prophet and apostles would be so circumspect in addition to the above? Again, I’m trying to come at this question from a faith-based perspective.
I think the first and most obvious assumption is that they didn’t have a clear cut, straight forward experience of standing in front of god in his presence, or as witnesses, they would say so. Most likely they are called in their calling as witnesses and serve with all their heart might and mind and know God as well as if they saw him but haven’t actually seen him. Other possibilities could be that God told them not to tell anyone for his purpose and to keep people faithfully searching (or for some wise purpose we don’t know of).
I can see Heber’s possible points, but I am more scratching my head along with Gerald. The top church leaders are more than willing to be bold and say many people are evil, wrong, and headed to hell (not those exact words). IF they have seen Christ then why not be bold missionaries and state it and tell the world to ask god if he agrees. If you have faith that you are right then this should bring many people to ask of God. We’re not the original apostles in this dispensation called mainly as missionaries? Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
A part of me wonders why someone that has a calling to be an special witness of the name of Christ would feel the need to keep their witness a secret in order to keep it special. Why be a mouthpiece if you aren’t going to mouth anything. Another part of me wonders whether seeing Christ with mortal eyes constitutes the type of thing that Christ wants witnessed. Maybe Christ wants people to be a witness/example of his teachings and any personal visitation doesn’t really contribute anything toward that end. Let’s say that Elder Eyring comes right out and says, “I saw Jesus standing in the 4th floor assembly room of the Salt Lake Temple.” I could see where that would really bolster someone’s faith, perhaps inspire them to live more righteously. I also see how it doesn’t really settle the matter. I’d be put in a position to have faith in Elder Eyring’s words whereas I’d rather place my faith directly in Christ. Making a claim to have seen Christ may serve as a distraction, the person that had the vision becomes the celebrity and we forget about where our focus should be.
Is it possible that maybe it’s a cultural difference? In the scriptures there are many times where prophets would ‘cast their pearls before swine’ because there were several times where they preached to wicked people about God speaking to them. But now it seems more common for people to talk about making sure you keep your experiences sacred rather than telling everyone. I can also imagine it being awkward if only some apostles and prophets have seen God. Can you imagine if only some of the GA’s had seen God, so they were the only ones talking about their discussions with God? I would imagine it would make people doubt the GA’s who hadn’t ever seen God. It seems like it could turn into a competition for who’s the most holy GA. I don’t know if that’s why it is that way now, but I can see where problems could arise if they always told us when they had visions. Those were some of my ideas that came to mind Elder Cook of the Q12 recently addressed that question in a devotional in the SLC temple. He said the Q12 and first presidency are sometimes asked why they don’t say they see the Savior more often. He basically said it’s so they don’t get into a contest among themselves over who’s had the most sacred experience or who’s seen Christ the most. I’ve heard that also, Roadrunner, and I think that is a lame response. That means we don’t want to relate the power of God and the miracles of his power because we don’t want to hurt someone else’s feelings? We need to be so politically correct even with our revelations? The scriptural accounts we have of Jesus appearing didn’t seem to have this effect. I personally feel it has more to do with the idea that it just doesn’t happen. And changes nothing to me. I accept them as witnesses. Period. I find it easier to accept them as limited witnesses rather than a required event to make the qualified as a witness. They are qualified when called by revelation.
Quote:I find it easier to accept them as limited witnesses rather than a required event to make the qualified as a witness. They are qualified when called by revelation.
I agree with Heber. There are alternative meanings to the word “witness.” I’ve never assumed they mean “eyewitness.”
I want to clarify that I don’t need the matter settled nor do I think the apostles and prophet should attempt to settle the matter. Maybe there is no “matter” to settle. It’s perhaps just idle speculation. If I think of the Book of Mormon prophets, I don’t recall too many who are recorded as having seen God. Lehi? Nephi? Brother of Jared? Just a handful.
I do wonder that if they haven’t been that kind of witness, again, why not just clarify? Would a testimony stating “I haven’t seen God but that doesn’t alter my belief in Him one way or another” be problematic? It’s probably the kind of testimony many members have.
First off I don’t think any ancient prophets saw God with their physical eyes, I think that is not possible. Likewise, I don’t think Joseph Smith saw God (or whatever he saw depending on the account) with his physical eyes. And, when the ancients saw God it seems to almost always have been Jehovah as opposed to Elohim. In the cases where it’s not clear it’s Jehovah, it’s also not clear it was God the Father – and probably wasn’t. From reading Rough Stone Rolling and some of Givens’s stuff, it is apparent Joseph didn’t talk much about the first vision. That’s not why he considered himself a prophet, he considered himself a prophet starting with Moroni’s visits. To him, the first vision was more personal.
I don’t believe any modern prophet/apostle aside from possibly Joseph Smith has seen Christ. I don’t think that’s what they mean by special witness, and Oaks even gave part of an address once on the idea he is a special witness for the
nameof Christ. If perhaps any of them have seen Christ it would seem to be personal and not limited to them – in other words one wouldn’t have to be an apostle/prophet to see Christ (considering the above, of course, that it is a rare occurrence anyway). If on the other hand they are saying that Christ personally revealed something to them for the church, then I think it would be necessary for them to say so. That does not appear to be how revelation for the church works – it appears to be the same as it works for the rest of us. Of course, there is a school of thought that the apostles had to be “witnesses” to Jesus’ mortal ministry. That could be why they stopped picking successors…because as time went on there might not be anyone left. The Catholic church claims that the authority was passed down to the bishops (especially the bishop of Rome). That of course flies in the face of the LDS apostasy and restoration narrative.
Yeah, I agree that it’s unlikely that our church leadership has seen the Savior personally although I don’t doubt they’ve had deeply spiritual experiences. I also thought it was a convenient excuse about why they don’t share publicly. If the Savior were to appear, really the only reason I can think of would be to “prove” He exists. Doesn’t seem that he would appear to introduce new doctrine or to course correct the church. We know from the scriptures that appearing merely to prove His existence and power doesn’t happen, the Spirit is much more convincing. So why would Jesus appear anyways?
I know several people that claim to have seen the Savior in dreams and they believe it with all their hearts. I think dreams or visions to be more likely scenarios than a literal visit.
Our scriptures record almost no physical visitations to anyone – at least, almost none that are written clearly as physical visitations. People expect too much of their leaders, and some leaders fan those unrealistic expectations.
I like that the current leadership has been quite clear in recent their statements – and I think it has been in response to some members (including a few prominent conservative apostates) who insist that “special witness” must include a physical visitation.
Quote:Our scriptures record almost no physical visitations to anyone – at least, almost none that are written clearly as physical visitations.
People expect too much of their leaders, and some leaders fan those unrealistic expectations.
I like that the current leadership has been quite clear in recent their statements – and I think it has been in response to some members (including a few prominent conservative apostates) who insist that “special witness” must include a physical visitation.
Ray,
I agree that there are unrealistic expectations and that physical visitations don’t need to be a prerequisite for being a special witness. However, I haven’t found General Authority’s statements to be that clear on this point. Could you point me in the direction of someone’s statement that does a good job with this?
Old-Timer wrote:Our scriptures record almost no physical visitations to anyone – at least, almost none that are written clearly as physical visitations.
People expect too much of their leaders, and some leaders fan those unrealistic expectations.
I like that the current leadership has been quite clear in recent their statements – and I think it has been in response to some members (including a few prominent conservative apostates) who insist that “special witness” must include a physical visitation.
Yes! I personally heard BKP, in a Stake Priesthood leadership meeting, say that he had NEVER seen a heavenly personage, never had a vision, and NEVER heard an audible voice from above tell him something. He lesson was that we were expecting too much from above, and we needed to just go with the promptings/ideas we receive in our callings.
Old-Timer wrote:Our scriptures record almost no physical visitations to anyone – at least, almost none that are written clearly as physical visitations.
My reading of the scriptures says that seeing God with Physical/mortal eyes is basically impossible. One must be “quickened by the spirit” or see with “spiritual eyes”. It is a spiritual event, physical photoreceptors will be of no use.
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.