Sustaining the Church Leaders as Prophets, and etc.

[Anonymous]

Old-Timer wrote:

CtS, I respect that reasoning (especially the part about having to have a personal witness / testimony / understanding / etc. to accept someone as “The Prophet”), and I am not trying to challenge your decision – but I feel like I need to point out a few things that I believe are factually inaccurate:

Quote:

“Incidentally, I would note that no prophet of God in history was ever called simply by outliving the competition.”

Actually, pretty much every Prophet in our scriptures became “The Prophet” because “The Prophet” before him died.

You make a valid point, though I would note that Lehi and Abinadi are both exceptions to this idea. The problem I have is not that someone needs to die to make room for another leader/prophet, just that that is the criteria used to determine who is the next prophet. The prophet is awarded a status in the church that makes his word unquestionable in our day. And what do we demand that person do to earn such an exalted status? Outlive all the other possible candidates for the position. The prophets in the scriptures were made prophets because they passed through personal trials and proved themselves (see Alma 13), not because they worked their way up through a certain system.

Quote:

“Especially if they were teaching things that weren’t what I wanted people to hear, like what a great job they are doing when they aren’t!”

President Monson’s central message for pretty much all of his ministry has been that we aren’t doing a great job at what he has preached as the center of the Gospel all of his time as an apostle – helping and serving the poor and the needy. He often teaches that through stories that sound warm and fuzzy, but the message has been constant and straightforward – and it hasn’t been a message of what a great job we are doing.

Also, I really am curious to know the “many” things he says that contradict the scriptures.

Again, I’m not trying to challenge your decision, but I honestly think the two things I mentioned above are not an accurate description of President Monson.

My comment was actually directed more to the entire body of the quorum of the twelve and the first presidency. That is the general idea I’ve been given from them for as long as I can remember. As for President Monson specifically, I’ve been confused by a lot of his talks lately. I’m not entirely certain what point he is making most of the time, even back when I would re-read the talks several times.

I have no desire to go through President Monson’s talks and pick out anything that contradicts the scriptures, but generally speaking, I can give you several examples of where modern teachings contradict scripture:

the philosophy of self-reliance

the idea that we can judge a person by what they do and how they look

the idea that we should support the leaders no matter what they do

the idea that the leaders are entitled to greater revelation than I am due to their position

the idea that a husband’s leadership position in the home entitles his decision to trump his wife’s

the warnings to abstain from reading anti-mormon materials in fear that we might be led astray

the general lack of reliance on the Lord and heightened reliance on ourselves

I could go on, but I think I’ve made my point. We accept all these 15 men as prophets of God, but they are not teaching us the word of God. Their teachings are the philosophies of men mingled with scripture and tend to lead us away from faith and reliance on the Savior. I know that’s harsh, but it’s the truth. The things they ask us to do generally teaches us that we earn our way to the kingdom of God. We have to rely on the Spirit if we are to learn any differently.

I should note that I have no qualms whatsoever of sustaining these men as church leaders. That, in my opinion is their proper role. But when they demand to be treated as prophets, or even as God Himself (unquestioning obedience) then they have misinterpreted their roles. I am not concerned about this flaw, though it can be a source of frustration sometimes, because I believe the church has its proper place in the salvation of man. I just don’t think that that place is salvation through reliance on it. Instead, I believe that it serves as a stumbling block to truly test people’s faith. If we can see through the lies taught in the church, we must truly have faith in God.

[Anonymous]

Kipper wrote:

How do we reconcile two people having different revelations about the same issue? This must happen often as I’m sure many people have have had a witness or personal revelation that TSM is a prophet and many have not. Personally I have been able to sustain him because I know the protocol was followed and that includes being prepared along with several other apostles for many years. Not because of intense prayer or pleading for a revelation. (Not ment to be ad hominem :angel: , only describing personal experience). Probably not the right reasons but I also look inside myself for opposing viewpoints or feelings and haven’t surfaced any. This is with a personal history of not appreciating President Monson for 30 years because of all his warm fuzzy stories meant to manipulate my emotions that I sometimes wonder if the origins are true. Even my relationship with my wife consistently turns up different personal revelations about the same issues that have caused consequences not so positive in our home however she is a temple goer and I am not, but that’s another thread I’ll hopefully get to soon.

I have no problem with Thomas S. Monson, because I think most of his statements are in line with Christ’s teachings about service to folks. I like the man.

On the other hand, I really, really could never sustain BKP as prophet. I can just about sustain him as some kind of leader.

[Anonymous]

Kipper wrote:

How do we reconcile two people having different revelations about the same issue? This must happen often as I’m sure many people have have had a witness or personal revelation that TSM is a prophet and many have not. Personally I have been able to sustain him because I know the protocol was followed and that includes being prepared along with several other apostles for many years. Not because of intense prayer or pleading for a revelation. (Not ment to be ad hominem :angel: , only describing personal experience). Probably not the right reasons but I also look inside myself for opposing viewpoints or feelings and haven’t surfaced any. This is with a personal history of not appreciating President Monson for 30 years because of all his warm fuzzy stories meant to manipulate my emotions that I sometimes wonder if the origins are true. Even my relationship with my wife consistently turns up different personal revelations about the same issues that have caused consequences not so positive in our home however she is a temple goer and I am not, but that’s another thread I’ll hopefully get to soon.

Kipper, we started talking about this same idea here on this thread

[Author]

Posts