Two standards of worthiness?

[Anonymous]

allquieton wrote:

The Church says anyone can be a prophet, but not the prophet. Obviously we don’t sustain everyone as prophets, seers, and revelators. I think they ought to clarify. Or have they already?

Scriptures often use the phrase holy prophets to describe the kind of prophet I’m talking about. And actually I don’t think the BoM ever uses the word prophet in any other sense.

Btw–I know that Joseph Smith said something to that effect, but it seems to me that the Church is only recently emphasizing the anyone-can-be-a-prophet doctrine. Any thoughts?

I think the clarification I’ve heard is that I will receive personal revelation, but I cannot receive revelation for others.

From early in church history, Joseph had to start clamping down on revelations from multiple sources throughout the church to establish order. Those holding keys have rights and privileges to receive revelation in that area of stewardship, and not beyond. I do not hold keys to receive revelation for our ward, stake, or general body of the church. Therefore, even if I have some revelation on what the Word of Wisdom means for me personally, I cannot establish my personal revelation beyond me. The prophet of the church can establish revelation for the entire church, and no one else could over ride that.

I think that is the basis of the temple recommend question…do you believe the Prophet and Q12 hold those keys to receive revelation for the church as mouthpieces for God. They are not just “good guys” but they actually hold God-given authority.

That is how I interpret it. I don’t think that means I have to agree with everything, nor does it mean I don’t have any doubts about things…but as long as the possibility exists that if anyone on earth has those keys I accept Pres Monson as the prophet today…I feel I can answer the question Yes honestly and not deceive my personal doubts and struggles with church matters.

[Anonymous]

Cadence wrote:

I have decide that when ask those questions I will first ask “please define what a prophet , seer, and revelator is” Once I get their definition I can respond as to whether I believe it or not. Besides it will be interesting to see what their answer is. Maybe I will find they are not so different than mine.

From the many experiences that have been told to me from others who have tried the same approach, you are mostly likely NOT going to be given a definition. They aren’t supposed to tell you the answer, only ask the question. Sucks huh? You are ultimately responsible for making that decision 😈

[Anonymous]

I’m not giving up my right to my own perspective to anyone. I have the right to answer those questions according to MY understanding of them – and that means a lot to me.

[Anonymous]

I’m guessing if God is ok with them asking vague questions without clarifications, He’ll be equally ok with honest but vague answers as well, like Ray said…how I decide to take their meaning. God knows my heart anyway.

[Anonymous]

mormonheretic wrote:

I’m not seeing any posts requiring approval.

Hawkgrrrl, GroundHog Day has to be one of my all-time favorite movies. When I was in college, we had a priesthood lesson on it, and it is a lesson I think I will remember forever!

Heh. Wish I’d been there.

The discussion wouldn’t be complete without reincarnation coming up, I’ll bet.

HiJolly

[Anonymous]

I have recently found this website, and very recently found myself in a position to need it, like many others never having imagined myself in this position. I have struggled in temple recommend interviews many times, not because I had trouble answering the questions, but because the interviewer didn’t believe me. I think the most blatant example is when I had a bishop basically telling me I would destroy my exaltation if I did a certain thing, and a stake president telling me I would destroy my exaltation if I did not do that very thing. I chose what to do based on what the spirit told me as I was listening to those two men, both my authorized priesthood leaders, told me. Interesting when you now have to interview with both of them for an interview, and the one whose opinion I did not follow determined I was not worthy because I did not support local leadership in not doing what he wanted (However, the other one would have wanted to deny the recommend on the same principle if I had made the other choice) I too am wondering how to answer next time. One thing that I have thought is to answer yes or no to all the questions. When I am asked in more detail to explain certain actions or answers, what would happen if I simply said that I had answered the official recommend question and we need to move on to the next, then stated that I will be happy to honestly answer further questions after you have determined my worthiness based on the official questions?

[Author]

Posts