Modern-Day Prophets (Latter-Day Saints, reject, Kingdom, beliefs, doctrine)

[Polaris]

This is a topic that has recently come up briefly in a few different threads so I decided it was time to bring it up on its own.

As many of you know, we LDS believe in a living modern-day prophet, called of God, and authorized to clarify and establish doctrines, and even canonize new revelations and new scripture. As one of our articles of faith states... "We believe all that God has revealed, all that He does now reveal, and we believe that He will yet reveal many great and important things pertaining to the Kingdom of God." We believe this is done through his chosen prophets just as explained by Amos - "Surely the Lord God will do nothing, but He revealeth his secret unto his servants the prophets." (Amos 3:7).

In light of the passage in Amos, and the fact that much of Christianity is based on the very existance of prophets, revelations, and inspired writings, why does it seem that most Christians deny the existance or even possible existance of modern-day prophets? It is ironic to me that a significant portion of the Bible portrays prophets who are rejected by the people and yet many Christians are so quick to do the same today. Why?

[Smoke]

Just for clarification, is this a debate for all Christians, or just LDS? (Not that I'm in either way. )

[Katzpur]

Originally Posted by MidnightBlue

Just for clarification, is this a debate for all Christians, or just LDS? (Not that I'm in either way. )

If it's in the debate forum, it would have to be for all Christians, since the Latter-day Saints would all see eye-to-eye on the matter.

[Polaris]

Originally Posted by MidnightBlue

Just for clarification, is this a debate for all Christians, or just LDS? (Not that I'm in either way. )

All Christians. Sorry if that wasn't clear, maybe this should be moved to the Biblical Debate forum.

[Smoke]

Originally Posted by Polaris

All Christians. Sorry if that wasn't clear, maybe this should be moved to the Biblical Debate forum.

Probably better to keep it here if you want to restrict it to Christians. Just wanted to be clear from the outset who was invited to debate. Of course, as Katzpur pointed out, I should've been able to figure that out.

[Polaris]

Originally Posted by MidnightBlue

Probably better to keep it here if you want to restrict it to Christians. Just wanted to be clear from the outset who was invited to debate. Of course, as Katzpur pointed out, I should've been able to figure that out.

As long as the debate doesn't turn into questioning the validity of Christianity in general or the Bible I have no problem with non-Christians sharing their views. The point is I find it ironic that many Christians, whose beliefs are based on prophets and inspired writings, are so quick to deny the existance of such today. If you have relevant insights on the topic, please share, regardless of whether you're Christian or not.

[kai]

i dont see why there cant be more prophets,unless there is something in scripture to say so , i know muslims say that mohamed was the last, is there anything in the new testement to say anything similar,what would it do to the popes position,i think a lot of people would be reluctant to hail a new prophet in the old countries ,vested interests and all that.

[Polaris]

Originally Posted by kai

i dont see why there cant be more prophets,unless there is something in scripture to say so , i know muslims say that mohamed was the last, is there anything in the new testement to say anything similar,what would it do to the popes position,i think a lot of people would be reluctant to hail a new prophet in the old countries ,vested interests and all that.

I don't know of anything in the NT that indicates there should be no more prophets. To the contrary Paul taught that the very foundation of Christ's church consists of "apostles and prophets" (Ephesians 2:20). And Amos' statement that I referenced previously seems to indicate quite emphatically that prophets are necessary.

You raise an interesting point. In order for many Christians to even begin to accept modern-day prophets and revelation, their view of the Pope would likely have to be altered.

So is it the vested interests of the people that keep them from realistically considering the possible existance of modern-day prophets, despite what scripture says and what Christianity itself is founded on?

[Quiddity]

Originally Posted by Polaris

This is a topic that has recently come up briefly in a few different threads so I decided it was time to bring it up on its own.

As many of you know, we LDS believe in a living modern-day prophet, called of God, and authorized to clarify and establish doctrines, and even canonize new revelations and new scripture. As one of our articles of faith states... "We believe all that God has revealed, all that He does now reveal, and we believe that He will yet reveal many great and important things pertaining to the Kingdom of God." We believe this is done through his chosen prophets just as explained by Amos - "Surely the Lord God will do nothing, but He revealeth his secret unto his servants the prophets." (Amos 3:7).

In light of the passage in Amos, and the fact that much of Christianity is based on the very existance of prophets, revelations, and inspired writings, why does it seem that most Christians deny the existance or even possible existance of modern-day prophets? It is ironic to me that a significant portion of the Bible portrays prophets who are rejected by the people and yet many Christians are so quick to do the same today. Why?

I think most Christians don't deny that modern-day prophets are among us. The disagreement is going to lie on the function and defintion of a prophet.

List of Catholic Prophets
http://web.archive.org/web/200410280...raeternatural/

Prophecy, Prophet, and Prophetess
http://www.newadvent.org/cathen/12477a.htm

[Polaris]

Originally Posted by Victor

I think most Christians don't deny that modern-day prophets are among us. The disagreement is going to lie on the function and defintion of a prophet.

OK. Good point. So why don't we establish a definition based on what we know about prophets from the Bible:

- Called by God and divinely inspired by Him.
- Singularly authorized to receive revelation (new knowledge) from God and establish it as doctrinally binding truth, including the establishment of new scripture.
- Subject to divine manifestations (angelic visitations, visions, etc)

Clearly there are others, but these seem to be relatively important ones. Do you have a problem with any of these as stated? If not, do you believe there is someone alive now that fits this description?