Mormonism and prophets

Revision as of 18:11, 2 March 2023 by DavidSmith (talk | contribs) (removed content included on another page)

FAIR Answers Wiki Main Page

Prophets and Church Leaders


Jump to Subtopic:

FAIR Answers Wiki Main Page

Articles about prophets and Church leaders



Mormonism and prophets


For Latter-day Saints, when our leaders speak, has the thinking been done?

The prophets themselves have counseled us to think for ourselves

It is clear the Church leaders counsel us to follow the guidance of the prophet. It is also clear that the prophets themselves have counseled us to think for ourselves. James E. Talmage summarized it well when he said that "God has not established His Church to make of its members irresponsible automatons, nor to exact from them blind obedience. Albeit, blessed is the man who, while unable to fathom or comprehend in full the Divine purpose underlying commandment and law, has such faith as to obey. So did Adam in offering sacrifice, yet, when questioned as to the significance of his service, he answered with faith and assurance worthy the patriarch of the race: "I know not, save the Lord commanded me."[1] Each one of us will ultimately be responsible for the decisions that we ourselves have made—not those that the prophet have made. As the Prophet Joseph Smith once said, "I teach them correct principles and they govern themselves."[2]

What about the statement from the Improvement Era

Critics use a statement made in the Ward Teachers' Message published in the Improvement Era in June 1945 to claim that members must do whatever Church leaders say without question. The statement is presented by the critics as follows:

Any Latter-day Saint who denounces or opposes, whether actively or otherwise, any plan or doctrine advocated by the "prophets, seers, and revelators" of the Church is cultivating the spirit of apostasy.... Lucifer ... wins a great victory when he can get members of the Church to speak against their leaders and to "do their own thinking."...

When our leaders speak, the thinking has been done. When they propose a plan—it is God's plan. When they point the way, there is no other which is safe. When they give direction, it should mark the end of controversy.[3]

We provide the complete quote below, with the phrases emphasized by the critics in bold type:

Any Latter-day Saint who denounces or opposes, whether actively or otherwise, any plan or doctrine advocated by the "prophets, seers, and revelators" of the Church is cultivating the spirit of apostasy. One cannot speak evil of the Lord's anointed and retain the Holy Spirit in his heart.

It should be remembered that Lucifer has a very cunning way of convincing unsuspecting souls that the General Authorities of the Church are as likely to be wrong as they are to be right. This sort of game is Satan's favorite pastime, and he has practiced it on believing souls since Adam. He wins a great victory when he can get members of the Church to speak against their leaders and to "do their own thinking." He specializes in suggesting that our leaders are in error while he plays the blinding rays of apostasy in the eyes of those whom he thus beguiles. What cunning! And to think that some of our members are deceived by this trickery.

The following words of the Prophet Joseph Smith should be memorized by every Latter-day Saint and repeated often enough to insure their never being forgotten:

I will give you one of the Keys of the mysteries of the Kingdom. It is an eternal principle, that has existed with God from all eternity: That man who rises up to condemn others, finding fault with the Church, saying that they are out of the way, while he himself is righteous, then know assuredly, that that man is in the high road to apostasy; and if he does not repent, will apostatize, as God lives. (Teachings of the Prophet Joseph Smith, pp. 156-157.)

When our leaders speak, the thinking has been done. When they propose a plan--it is God's plan. When they point the way, there is no other which is safe. When they give direction, it should mark the end of controversy. God works in no other way. To think otherwise, without immediate repentance, may cost one his faith, may destroy his testimony, and leave him a stranger to the kingdom of God.

When the ward teaching message was published, concerns were raised regarding how this statement would be interpreted. President George Albert Smith responded to a concern expressed by Dr. Raymond A. Cope of the First Unitarian Society:

The leaflet to which you refer, and from which you quote in your letter, was not "prepared" by "one of our leaders." However, one or more of them inadvertently permitted the paragraph to pass uncensored. By their so doing, not a few members of the Church have been upset in their feelings, and General Authorities have been embarrassed.

I am pleased to assure you that you are right in your attitude that the passage quoted does not express the true position of the Church. Even to imply that members of the Church are not to do their own thinking is grossly to misrepresent the true ideal of the Church, which is that every individual must obtain for himself a testimony of the truth of the Gospel, must, through the redemption of Jesus Christ, work out his own salvation, and is personally responsible to His Maker for his individual acts. The Lord Himself does not attempt coercion in His desire and effort to give peace and salvation to His children. He gives the principles of life and true progress, but leaves every person free to choose or to reject His teachings. This plan the Authorities of the Church try to follow.[4]

Finally, we should point out that, in a 1946 letter to Dean Brimhall, Elder Albert E. Bowen of the Quorum of the Twelve rejected the ward teachers' message even more forcefully than had President Smith and explained that it had been written by a young clerk in the Presiding Bishop's office and sent out without anyone in authority having approved it.[5]

Brigham Young: "I exhort you to think for yourselves"

Brigham Young made the following statements:

Ladies and gentlemen, I exhort you to think for yourselves, and read your Bibles for yourselves, get the Holy Spirit for yourselves, and pray for yourselves.[6]

The great masses of the people neither think nor act for themselves. . . . I see too much of this gross ignorance among this chosen people of God.[7]

Joseph Smith said the following:

All have the privilege of thinking for themselves upon all matters relative to conscience. . . . We are not disposed, had we the power, to deprive anyone of exercising that free independence of mind which heaven has so graciously bestowed upon the human family as one of its choicest gifts.[8]

Dallin H. Oaks: "We can be united in following our leaders and yet independent in knowing for ourselves."

Dallin H. Oaks shared the following in the April 2008 conference:

Members who have a testimony and who act upon it under the direction of their Church leaders are sometimes accused of blind obedience.

Of course, we have leaders, and of course, we are subject to their decisions and directions in the operation of the Church and in the performance of needed priesthood ordinances. But when it comes to learning and knowing the truth of the gospel—our personal testimonies—we each have a direct relationship with God, our Eternal Father, and His Son, Jesus Christ, through the powerful witness of the Holy Ghost. This is what our critics fail to understand. It puzzles them that we can be united in following our leaders and yet independent in knowing for ourselves.

Perhaps the puzzle some feel can be explained by the reality that each of us has two different channels to God. We have a channel of governance through our prophet and other leaders. This channel, which has to do with doctrine, ordinances, and commandments, results in obedience. We also have a channel of personal testimony, which is direct to God. This has to do with His existence, our relationship to Him, and the truth of His restored gospel. This channel results in knowledge. These two channels are mutually reinforcing: knowledge encourages obedience (see Deuteronomy 5:27; Moses 5:11), and obedience enhances knowledge (see John 7:17; D&C 93:1).[9]

President Tanner's statement was referring to several specific moral issues

N. Eldon Tanner once said, "When the prophet speaks the debate is over." One critic of the Church even goes so far to state, "Some things that are true are not very useful + It is wrong to criticize leaders of the Church, even if the criticism is true + Spying and monitoring on members + Intellectuals are dangerous + When the prophet speaks the debate is over + Obedience is the First Law of Heaven = Policies and practices you’d expect to find in a totalitarian system such as North Korea or 1984; not from the gospel of Jesus Christ." [10]

President Tanner is speaking about several specific moral issues, which he outlines in his talk. He is not advocating that one should not think for themselves:

Why should there be any debate over the moral issues which are confounding the world today? From the beginning God has made his position very clear in regard to marriage, divorce, family life and love of children, immorality, chastity, virtue, and the high and holy role of women. Through his prophet today he reiterates the Old and New Testament teachings which are clear on these matters.
....
To gain these riches many engage in the debates on moral issues. The alcohol and tobacco industries and dealers in pornography are accumulating great wealth at the expense of the people and to the detriment of their health. With all the evidence of child pornography, it is deplorable that any parent would allow any child to be so exploited. Some children are being neglected and abused because their mothers are seeking worldly pleasures and careers outside the home. Many fathers are more concerned with their financial success than with the welfare of their wives and children.

We must turn all this about. We cannot serve God and mammon. Whose side are we on? When the prophet speaks the debate is over.

Statement from the Church's Newsroom

Belief in prophets and apostles at the head of the Church does not mean that members blindly follow their leaders. While the prophet of God receives revelation and inspiration to guide the Church as a whole, revelation flows at every level, including to the leaders of congregations and to individual families and members. In fact, individual members are expected to seek that kind of divine guidance to help them in their own lives, in their responsibilities in the Church and even in temporal pursuits, including their occupations. Members are also expected to prayerfully seek their own “testimony” or conviction of the principles their leaders teach them.[11]

Notes

  1. James E. Talmage, The Vitality of Mormonism, (Deseret News Press, 1919), 42.
  2. George Q. Cannon, Life of Joseph Smith, the Prophet (Salt Lake City, Utah: Juvenile Instructor Office, 1888), 529.
  3. Ward Teachers' Message for June, 1945, "SUSTAINING THE GENERAL AUTHORITIES OF THE CHURCH" Improvement Era, June 1945, p.354
  4. Letter from President George Albert Smith to Dr. J. Raymond Cope, Dec. 7, 1945 (emphasis added).
  5. Albert E. Bowen to Dean Brimhall, 26 October 1946, p. 1. Dean R. Brimhall papers, MS 114, box 12, folder 21, Manuscripts Division, J. Willard Marriott Library, Salt Lake City, Utah.
  6. Brigham Young, Journal of Discourses 11:107.
  7. Brigham Young, Journal of Discourses 9:295.
  8. Joseph Smith, Jr., Teachings of the Prophet Joseph Smith, selected by Joseph Fielding Smith, (Salt Lake City: Deseret Book Company, 1976), 49. off-site
  9. Dallin H. Oaks, "Testimony," Ensign (May 2008).
  10. Jeremy Runnells, "Letter to a CES Director" (2013)
  11. "Prophets," LDS Newsroom

Introduction to Question

Many members of The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints and other interested parties have wondered what the standards for presidential succession are in the Church and how they were set up under the direction of the Prophet Joseph Smith. These standards are important to document as the perceived legitimacy of the Church as God's "only true and living church upon the face of the whole earth" (Doctrine & Covenants 1:30) can be threatened by offshoot sects of Mormonism or other Mormon Gnostics if the standards are misunderstood.


The characteristics of Latter-day Saint ("Mormon") prophets


Jump to Subtopic:


Revelation after Joseph Smith

Summary: If every President of the Church is a prophet, seer, and revelator, why have so few revelations after Joseph Smith been added to the Doctrine and Covenants? Revelations used to be printed in Church periodicals such as the Times and Seasons and the Evening and Morning Star. Why are revelations no longer published on an ongoing basis?


Jump to Subtopic:


The Family: A Proclamation to the World


Jump to Subtopic:


Jackson County, Missouri


Jump to Subtopic:

FAIR Answers Wiki Main Page

Articles about prophets and Church leaders



Mormonism and prophets


Was Russell M. Nelson part of a satanic cult called “Skull and Bones” in college?

The collegiate honor society “Skull and Bones” began at Yale University in 1832. Students at the University of Utah formed their own Skull and Bones society in 1909. Like other honor societies, this society is “comprised of students who have been actively involved on campus and who are committed to furthering the U’s success and notoriety.” To be admitted, a student is invited and has to “maintain a 3.5 GPA, and be actively involved in different campus groups.”[1]

One member of the society described those who are invited and who participate: “They’re the ‘difference-makers’—people that get stuff done. . . . Our affiliation is one that doesn’t revolve around us socializing as much as accomplishing the task at hand.” This includes “assisting and leading campus groups, networking, working with the Alumni Association and supporting administrators.” Another member of the society said, “We really meet as a group of friends. We go to dinner and talk, get to know each other…try to create a better bond of brotherhood.” .[2]

Since the society’s founding in 1909, members have had varying levels of privacy or secrecy. Currently, membership is anonymous to those outside the society. This is intended to “creat[e] an ‘invisible force’ and ‘honor[] tradition,’ [and] works to ensure that no one in the group lets their membership go to their head.” For this reason, members may dress in a mask and hood for meetings. “Despite their off-putting appearance, the group assure[s] . . . they were actually quite relaxed. One individual described the group as ‘one big happy family’ comprised of ‘light and fun interaction.’"[3]

Prominent members of the Skull and Bones society (living or deceased, either from the University of Utah or other universities) include George H. W. Bush, George W. Bush, John Kerry, Russell M. Nelson, Robert D. Hales, Arnold Ferrin (a famous basketball player), David McCullough (a famous author), and Daniel Gilman (founder of The Johns Hopkins University).[4] </onlyinclude>

Notes

  1. Rochelle McConkie, “Bonesmen celebrate 100 years,” The Daily Utah Chronicle, 3 February 2009.
  2. McConkie, “Bonesmen celebrate 100 years.”
  3. Casey Koldewyn, “Getting to Know Secret Student Society Skull and Bones,” The Daily Utah Chronicle, 8 December 2015.
  4. McConkie, “Bonesmen celebrate 100 years”; William H. Jarrett II, “Yale, Skull and Bones, and the Beginnings of Johns Hopkins,” Baylor University Medical Center Proceedings, 24:1 (2011).

Back to top

Did Russell M. Nelson exaggerate his story about being in a falling airplane?

In 1976, Russell M. Nelson was in a small commuter airplane traveling from Salt Lake City to St. George. During the flight, the plane experienced engine trouble and rapidly decreased in altitude. President Nelson described the experience:

I remember vividly an experience I had as a passenger in a small two-propeller airplane. One of its engines suddenly burst open and caught on fire. The propeller of the flaming engine was starkly stilled. As we plummeted in a steep spiral dive toward the earth, I expected to die. Some of the passengers screamed in hysterical panic. Miraculously, the precipitous dive extinguished the flames. Then, by starting up the other engine, the pilot was able to stabilize the plane and bring us down safely.[1]

According to a Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) summary report the next year, this accident was one of three involving Sky West Airlines over the course of a month. As a result, the Civil Aeronautics Board (CAB) temporarily suspended Sky West’s authorization to fly to certain airports. As part of proceedings regarding the suspension, the FAA provided summary information regarding the three accidents. The FAA’s summary of the incident involving President Nelson’s plane reads:

Second incident occurred Nov. 11, 1976 involving Piper PA 31 N74985. Pilot experienced rough engine on scheduled flight between Salt Lake City and St. George. 3 passengers on board. Engine was feathered and precautionary landing made at Delta, Utah, per instructions in company manual. Investigation revealed cylinder base studs sheered. As result of occurrence Sky West changed maintenance procedures by checking torque studs at each 100 hour inspection. No damage to aircraft. No injuries to crew or passengers.[2]

Because the summary report does not mention a fire, some have wondered if this means President Nelson exaggerated his story. It is important to remember that this summary is not the investigative report of the incident and thus would not include complete details regarding the investigation. The summary was included with summaries of two other incidents in order to determine what led to airplane malfunctions for Sky West aircraft.

That is important because the fire President Nelson saw was likely a result of burning fuel leaking from the engine. Thus, it is not necessary that the mechanical components of the engine burned in order for the engine to appear to be on fire. Thus, the summary report would state there was no engine damage while at the same time there was a fire during the incident. </onlyinclude>

Notes

  1. Russell M. Nelson, “Doors of Death,” April 1992 general conference.
  2. James H. Stevenson, letter to Billy L. Abram, dated March 30, 1977, included in filing for Dockets 27907, 27908, Hughes Airwest, Deletion—order 77-4-50 adopted April 11, 1977; included in Civil Aeronautics Board, Economic Decisions of the Civil Aeronautics Board, Volume 73 (1977), 1090; cf. 1087–1090.
Back to top