Forum Replies Created
-
Posts
-
Like the OP, this wasn’t an issue that originally bothered me much. I actually just came across personal journal notes from over a year ago where I stated that I felt like this was an overblown issue, and that it didn’t bother me. However, I stumbled upon an analysis by Grant Palmer from just a couple weeks ago that raised a new eyebrow for me. You can see an outline here (
http://mormonthink.com/grant12.htm ). The correlation I had never noticed was that the First Vision story developed with some interesting parallels to Joseph’s general doctrine on the Godhead. There’s pretty interesting correlations between changes in the FV story and changes made to the BOM and D&C to support a development from Trinity to Godhead to Many Gods.This kinda reopened the issue for me a little bit, and I’m not sure quite what to think any more.
This is a question that has pressed on me a lot. Though the rescinding of the practice of polygamy and the rescinding of the priesthood ban have been “canonized” – they do not include any words of deity. Even Section 138 – a vision of the spirit world given to Joseph F. Smith – does not contain any words from the Father or the Son. Thus, we as a church have not heard a prophet or apostle claim to speak for the Lord since Brigham Young did in 1846. We’ve heard prophets and apostles relate stories of spiritual experiences, visions, and impressions – but none have claimed to have received any real messages from God.
What does this mean to us?
The method of revelation has changed – God no longer “speaks” like he used to, but revelation is still received all the time?
God has stopped “speaking” for some reason?
He speaks, but the prophets are forbidden (or choose not to) convey his words to the church at this time?
He never “spoke” – but Joseph (and Brigham, once) chose to put convey their understandings in first person?
The church has gone astray, and God no longer guides it as he once did?
God never guided the church, and the first-person revelation was never real?
Depending on your feelings, you probably find one of those explanations more palatable than the others. There may be other explanations too, I’m interested to see how this thread continues. For a church which makes it’s most defining unique claim the fact that we have living prophets, seers, and revelators – we’ve sure gone a long time without “traditional” prophecy, seership, or revelation haven’t we?
