Argument for living prophets in the LDS Church

[Scott C.]

If a person claims to be a prophet of God, one of the following must be true:

1. The person knows he is a prophet, is telling the truth, and is a prophet.
2. The person thinks he's a prophet, is telling the truth of what he believes, but is deceived (by Satan, mental disorder, low intelligence, doesn't understand what a prophet is, misinterprets personal experiences, etc., etc.) and is not a prophet.
3. The person knows he is not a prophet, is intentionally lying, and is not a prophet.

In the LDS Church, 15 men claim to be prophets of God. This includes the First Presidency and the Quorum of the Twelve.

I'll start with (3). As a practicing Latter-day Saint, I know first hand of the sincerity of most members of my church. For example, I don't claim to be a prophet. But, I know in my heart that I'm sincere in my LDS convictions. Someone might argue that I'm deceived, but nobody can successfully argue that I lie about what I believe. I am no different in this regard to most other members of my church.

Nobody in my church volunteers to become leaders in the church. These opportunities come as callings from higher leaders. I could theoretically be called to be a Bishop, a Stake President, or a member of the Quorum of the Twelve. All of the 15 who now claim to be prophets were once like me, a believing church member in no particular position of prominence. If I were called to join the Twelve, would it be reasonable to think that I switched from being honest to being a liar? No, it would not be.

Based on the general honesty of rank and file Mormons and based on the fact that leaders are called from among those ranks, it is inconceivable to think that those who are called as Apostles and Prophets do not honestly believe in their calling, To be otherwise, when a person is called to high position in my church, they would have to discover that the church is not true, decide to stop believing, decide to become a liar, and then claim to be a prophet in order to propogate the falsehood. They would leave the ranks of the "deceived" to join the ranks of the "deceiver". Perhaps a couple of people here and there could change stripes from integrity to liar over the years, but not the entire group of those who are called to be Prophets and Apostles.

I, therefore, find (3) to be an impossible and an illogical idea, based on my firsthand experience in the LDS Church.

Let's discuss (2). All 15 men claim to be prophets and apostles. They claim to have had sacred spiritual experiences, after which God specifically commanded them to not reveal it, due to its sacredness, and due to the fact that many would ridicule. Joseph Smith was commanded to speak freely of his revelations, but in our day, the prophets have been commanded to not speak so freely of theirs. Nevertheless, all 15 of these men make it clear that they have each had such revelatory experiences. They testify that they have absoulte, positive knowledge of Jesus Christ, by revelation. If you're Christian, think of the certitude of Moses, Noah, Peter, or John as to what they believed. Their revelatory experiences lifted them beyond just believing into having a factual knowledge, as certain as they know that they exist. These 15 men in the LDS church claim to have the same revelatory knowledge.

Since we're on (2), let's consider if 15 men can be so deceived? It would not just be 15, but all 15 over the years from Joseph Smith forward. These men are highly intelligent. I already established their honesty. They come from the ranks of educators, heart surgeons, state supreme court judges, Harvard professors, scientists. and other reputable positions. They are men of great accomplishment and talent. These are not men who decided at some point in life that they wanted to enter the ministry because they felt "called". These are men who were literally plucked up from what they were doing and asked to serve in their current church position.

Knowing what I know about these 15 men, it's inconceivable to me that they are all deceived. They are too well grounded to all believe that they have had these miraculous revelations when they really didn't happen. It would be like believing that all 11 Apostles were deceived when Christ appeared to them after the resurrection and told them to touch his body and see for themselves.

If 2 and 3 are inconceivable, that leaves 1. Think about it.

 

[madhatter85]

If a person claims to be a prophet of God, one of the following must be true:

1. The person knows he is a prophet, is telling the truth, and is a prophet.
2. The person thinks he's a prophet, is telling the truth of what he believes, but is deceived (by Satan, mental disorder, low intelligence, doesn't understand what a prophet is, misinterprets personal experiences, etc., etc.) and is not a prophet.
3. The person knows he is not a prophet, is intentionally lying, and is not a prophet.

In the LDS Church, 15 men claim to be prophets of God. This includes the First Presidency and the Quorum of the Twelve.

I'll start with (3). As a practicing Latter-day Saint, I know first hand of the sincerity of most members of my church. For example, I don't claim to be a prophet. But, I know in my heart that I'm sincere in my LDS convictions. Someone might argue that I'm deceived, but nobody can successfully argue that I lie about what I believe. I am no different in this regard to most other members of my church.

Nobody in my church volunteers to become leaders in the church. These opportunities come as callings from higher leaders. I could theoretically be called to be a Bishop, a Stake President, or a member of the Quorum of the Twelve. All of the 15 who now claim to be prophets were once like me, a believing church member in no particular position of prominence. If I were called to join the Twelve, would it be reasonable to think that I switched from being honest to being a liar? No, it would not be.

Based on the general honesty of rank and file Mormons and based on the fact that leaders are called from among those ranks, it is inconceivable to think that those who are called as Apostles and Prophets do not honestly believe in their calling, To be otherwise, when a person is called to high position in my church, they would have to discover that the church is not true, decide to stop believing, decide to become a liar, and then claim to be a prophet in order to propogate the falsehood. They would leave the ranks of the "deceived" to join the ranks of the "deceiver". Perhaps a couple of people here and there could change stripes from integrity to liar over the years, but not the entire group of those who are called to be Prophets and Apostles.

I, therefore, find (3) to be an impossible and an illogical idea, based on my firsthand experience in the LDS Church.

Let's discuss (2). All 15 men claim to be prophets and apostles. They claim to have had sacred spiritual experiences, after which God specifically commanded them to not reveal it, due to its sacredness, and due to the fact that many would ridicule. Joseph Smith was commanded to speak freely of his revelations, but in our day, the prophets have been commanded to not speak so freely of theirs. Nevertheless, all 15 of these men make it clear that they have each had such revelatory experiences. They testify that they have absoulte, positive knowledge of Jesus Christ, by revelation. If you're Christian, think of the certitude of Moses, Noah, Peter, or John as to what they believed. Their revelatory experiences lifted them beyond just believing into having a factual knowledge, as certain as they know that they exist. These 15 men in the LDS church claim to have the same revelatory knowledge.

Since we're on (2), let's consider if 15 men can be so deceived? It would not just be 15, but all 15 over the years from Joseph Smith forward. These men are highly intelligent. I already established their honesty. They come from the ranks of educators, heart surgeons, state supreme court judges, Harvard professors, scientists. and other reputable positions. They are men of great accomplishment and talent. These are not men who decided at some point in life that they wanted to enter the ministry because they felt "called". These are men who were literally plucked up from what they were doing and asked to serve in their current church position.

Knowing what I know about these 15 men, it's inconceivable to me that they are all deceived. They are too well grounded to all believe that they have had these miraculous revelations when they really didn't happen. It would be like believing that all 11 Apostles were deceived when Christ appeared to them after the resurrection and told them to touch his body and see for themselves.

If 2 and 3 are inconceivable, that leaves 1. Think about it.

Wonderful pust, absolutely wonderful.

 

[Watchmen]

Why is it inconceivable that all 15 through the generations are all deceived? If it turns out the church isn't true, then that means MILLIONS througout the generations have been deceived. If that's the case, then 15 doesn't seem like such a big deal.

 

[Scott C.]

Why is it inconceivable that all 15 through the generations are all deceived? If it turns out the church isn't true, then that means MILLIONS througout the generations have been deceived. If that's the case, then 15 doesn't seem like such a big deal.

Yes, that would mean that millions were deceived. But, the purpose of this thread is to examine possibilities 1, 2, and 3 as they relate only to those who claim to be prophets.

 

[Halcyon]

I personally think that the prophets of your faith, current and past, honestly believed they were Prophets and honestly believed that when they were called it was because they were chosen by God to serve in that position.

The only deception, from my POV, comes from their own sincerity of faith. They believe devoutly and this affects how they see themselves and their position.

EDIT: I don't see anything wrong in them believing as they do either, since they play admirable roles in community leadership. It's just that for me, they can't be Prophets and so there must be an alternative explanation.

 

[cardero]

ScottC writes: But, I know in my heart that I'm sincere in my LDS convictions.

There are two concerns I have with this:
1. The heart will never be a reliable indicator of Truth (but it has been proposed to me that the soul can).
2. Sincerity and faith does not reveal Truth.

ScottC writes: Someone might argue that I'm deceived, but nobody can successfully argue that I lie about what I believe. I am no different in this regard to most other members of my church.

Someone could also argue that it is possibly conceivable but if one’s pride, ego and reasoning centers are blocked, there will not be much of an argument or discussion because both sides would be immovable in their faith. When it comes to true understanding this obstacles (faith and sincerity) can become insurmountable.

ScottC writes: Nobody in my church volunteers to become leaders in the church. These opportunities come as callings from higher leaders.

These opportunities are partial and only available from uncertain leaders towards internal members that only follow the doctrines of that particular religion. There is no fair, inclusive, valid search, interview, campaign or review for knowlegable individuals who may have reasonable claim to represent GOD.
In musical recording terms, this would be considered a "closed session".

ScottC writes: Based on the general honesty of rank and file Mormons and based on the fact that leaders are called from among those ranks, it is inconceivable to think that those who are called as Apostles and Prophets do not honestly believe in their calling,

There should be no rank and file represented in the Mormon religion. One of the most respectable aspects of the Mormon religion is that everyone can and should have a personal relationship with GOD. What this means is that anything that GOD has to divulge concerning any aspects of an individual's existence (past, present and future) should be revealed to you in person and not represented by a leader or a stranger (past, present and future) in the form of revelation. What this entails is that the religion has created and justified a position for someone to act as a “go between” or “a middle man” when the relationship will basically (essentially) be between you and GOD anyway.

ScottC writes: They testify that they have absoulte, positive knowledge of Jesus Christ, by revelation.

But unfortunately this does not explain whether they have the Truth.

ScottC writes: Since we're on (2), let's consider if 15 men can be so deceived? It would not just be 15, but all 15 over the years from Joseph Smith forward.

Why are you qualifying believability in numbers and years? There is no extra strength or emphasis to a belief by the number of years or the quantity of people who believe in it. The possibility also exists that all the apostles throughout the many generations of Mormon history could have been incorrect in their knowledge and teachings of GOD and nobody has sincerely explained to me how one prepares for the Truth (or Untruth) if their doctrines are found suspect or incorrect.

ScottC writes: These men are highly intelligent. I already established their honesty. They come from the ranks of educators, heart surgeons, state supreme court judges, Harvard professors, scientists. and other reputable positions.

So what, Jesus was a simple carpenter and out of all his parables, sermons and proverbs he has never thouroughly explained how much he would charge to construct a set of bookshelves.

ScottC writes: Knowing what I know about these 15 men, it's inconceivable to me that they are all deceived.

While you seem to have done a fine job in establishing and promoting their profession and character (I am sure each and everyone of the 15 prophets are very nice) but you have done very little to establish and validate who GOD decides to divulge revelation to and who He does not.

 

[Scott C.]

There are two concerns I have with this:
1. The heart will never be a reliable indicator of Truth (but it has been proposed to me that the soul can).
2. Sincerity and faith does not reveal Truth.

I have not made any argument as to if its possible that I am deceived. I am arguing that since I am sincere and those I know in the church are sincere, that the leaders at the top are also sincere. This line of reasoning does not establish that I or they are correct. It just establishes that they are honest. It eliminates the possibility of option (3), which says that those who claim to be prophets are lying.

There should be no rank and file represented in the Mormon religion. One of the most respectable aspects of the Mormon religion is that everyone can and should have a personal relationship with GOD. What this means is that anything that GOD has to divulge concerning any aspects of an individual's existence (past, present and future) should be revealed to you in person and not represented by a leader or a stranger (past, present and future) in the form of revelation. What this entails is that the religion has created and justified a position for someone to act as a “go between” or “a middle man” when the relationship will basically (essentially)

be between you and GOD anyway.

I may have given a false impression in some of what I said. One of the beautiful things about my church is that there is not really a distinction between the members and the clergy. All are the same. We all serve as we are called. There are no special revelations that are reserved for the prophets and apostles, except that they have responsibility to lead the entire church. But, in my opinion, not all members of the church have attained to the same spiritual level as they have. That's not because God puts a restriction on spriritual experiences based on leadership level, but rather because we do not all progress spiritually at the same pace. I have my own personal conviction or testimony based on a direct relationship between God and me, without a human go between. But, I do gain additional strength of conviction when I know that there are at least 15 men who I trust and who tell me that they have a perfect knowledge of these things. So, while I know spiritual things independent of other humans, I still draw strength from those who have the calling and revelations that qualify them as "special witnesses" of Christ to the world.

Why are you qualifying believability in numbers and years? There is no extra strength or emphasis to a belief by the number of years or the quantity of people who believe in it. The possibility also exists that all the apostles throughout the many generations of Mormon history could have been incorrect in their knowledge and teachings of GOD and nobody has sincerely explained to me how one prepares for the Truth (or Untruth) if their doctrines are found suspect or incorrect.

There is additional credibility based on the number of witnesses, the number of years, and the nature of the revelations claimed. Suppose that there are several people in whom you have complete confidence. You know them all to be honest and intelligent. Suppose one of them says he had a dream last night about God and now believes he's a prophet. Suppose another says that while he was praying he had a peaceful feeling that he should do something, You could conclude that a dream is only a dream and a peaceful feeling is only a peaceful feeling, and the men are making too much out of it. But, suppose this man says that in broad daylight God appeared to him and gave him a message. Suppose 6 more of these people make the same exact claim. Now it gets a little harder to explain. Suppose 10 other men testify to the same experience happening at different times. And suppose the experiences match in detail to the others. It's getting harder to say that all of them were deceived or are making too much out of it. It starts to seem that either it happened or they are all lying. Suppose also that three of them tell you that an angel came to them all at the same time in broad daylight and delivered a message from God. Now you start thinking. wow, this either happened or they are making it all up for some reason. The likelihood of all of them being deceived is decreasing as the number and magnitude of the revelations increases and the number of the first hand witnesses increases. The more people and time and specific revelations you add to this scenario, the harder and harder it becomes to explain it away as "good people who think something happened, but it didn't really happen". Remember, in this scenario, their integrity can't be called into question, because one of the assumptions is that they are all honest people.

While you seem to have done a fine job in establishing and promoting their profession and character (I am sure each and everyone of the 15 prophets are very nice) but you have done very little to establish and validate who GOD decides to divulge revelation to and who He does not.

You are correct that I made no effort to establish what you say. There are many avenues I could take to make an argument for living prophets. I chose to focus only on the possibilities of (1), (2), and (3) as stated in the opening post. I believe my arguments are strong for establishing that options (2) and (3) are quite inconceivable when you really understand the number of men who testify, what it is that they claim has happened, and when you understand their strength of character.

 

[Scott C.]

I don't see anything wrong in them believing as they do either, since they play admirable roles in community leadership. It's just that for me, they can't be Prophets and so there must be an alternative explanation.

Why must there be an alternative explanation? Is is not possible that they are prophets as they claim?

 

[Mister Emu]

These are men who were literally plucked up from what they were doing and asked to serve in their current church position.

No offense, but I find that the idea that these people had no idea they were "up for the job" as it were stretches my credulity...

Since we're on (2), let's consider if 15 men can be so deceived? It would not just be 15, but all 15 over the years from Joseph Smith forward.

And if you are right there would be far more deceived... If that far larger number is acceptable, why is your 15 over the years "inconceivable"?

 

[Sententia]

Why must there be an alternative explanation? Is is not possible that they are prophets as they claim?

No, its not. IMHO.

If you want an honest answer... we can no more prove god than disprove but we can examine the matter and assign probabalities of their being a god, that mormonism is the only true religion, that of all of the stories and various gods its the jesus story that is correct, that there is a way to communicate with this god, that this god then chooses 15 people to speak his will too... etc etc.

The odds I think don't even warrant serious thought on the subject for me.

These 15 people offer no evidence or proof to further their cause. Historically their prophets have done nothing more than be human with normal human insights, some bad and some good. They have even excommunicated some and some have just left so we could argue thier claim that they can speak to god doesn't really mean anything spectacular to begin with.

And mormons are not the only religion to make claims of prophets and their god is not the only one to talk to people. Prophets are often wrong and when wrong they are misunderstood or they misunderstood god or their claims innane... god wants you to be better person.

Overall I ignore claims of prophets. Its contradicting to many other people, assumes many things for which after 100s of years we still have no proof of and seems pointless to even debate.

Prophets are real in the same way Suzane Northrop can speak with the dead and both prophets are Suzane are very sincere and believe they are only using their gifts to help us.

 

[Terrywoodenpic]

The latter day Saints are a religion that believes in living Prophets.
It has a structure and theology that supports this belief.

It is no wonder that their faith and belief system strengthens their chosen Prophets to accept the true nature of their calling.

No deceit or lying need be involved.

Statistically it might be thought exceptional that no person who has accepted the role of a Prophet has not had doubts as to the truth and their worthiness for their election.
This is true of people in all religions with a calling.

That there may have been Popes that have been rather less than holy, and Bishops and priests who have been positively Evil, but these happenings do not deny the sanctity of the majority who receive a vocation and calling.

Likewise a Prophet who is proved to be false would have no effect on the truth of countless others.

whilst I do not share the faith of the Latter Day Saints, I have absolutely no reason to doubt the the presence of Prophets on earth today.

 

[cardero]

ScottC writes: I am arguing that since I am sincere and those I know in the church are sincere, that the leaders at the top are also sincere. This line of reasoning does not establish that I or they are correct. It just establishes that they are honest. It eliminates the possibility of option (3), which says that those who claim to be prophets are lying.

It could also mean that they could pass a lie detector test but the bottom value is that the LDS prophets do not have to practice lying to be defined as liars. If the doctrines and teachings that they “believe are true” are proven incorrect they will be judged as spreading and promoting Untruth. How the LDS leaders and congregation members reconcile these incorrect teachings among themselves and society will prove very interesting to this poster.

ScottC writes: But, I do gain additional strength of conviction when I know that there are at least 15 men who I trust and who tell me that they have a perfect knowledge of these things.

You are correct that I made no effort to establish what you say. There are many avenues I could take to make an argument for living prophets. I chose to focus only on the possibilities of (1), (2), and (3) as stated in the opening post. I believe my arguments are strong for establishing that options (2) and (3) are quite inconceivable when you really understand the number of men who testify, what it is that they claim has happened, and when you understand their strength of character.

You are coming very close to creating GOD in the LDS image. There is no extra value to a belief that is steeped in trust or faith. Forget about fruits, forget about the messenger’s profession, forget about multitudes, forget about what you want, desire and hope for a belief. There are only two values to the message or the belief. Truth or Untruth. Which one of these are the LDS prophets promoting or teaching? This is what you seem to be interested in knowing.

 

[Scott C.]

Statistically it might be thought exceptional that no person who has accepted the role of a Prophet has not had doubts as to the truth and their worthiness for their election.

Those who are called to be Apostles often speak of their deep personal feelings of inadequacy and they wonder why someone else was not called, who seems more qualified. But, they always make it clear that in spite of their self doubts, they do indeed possess the perfect knowledge, based on revelation, that Jesus Christ lives and this is his church.

 

[tomspug]

Nobody in my church volunteers to become leaders in the church. These opportunities come as callings from higher leaders.

And it doesn't bother you at all that NONE of the prophets of the Bible were elected in this manner?

 

[Scott C.]

It could also mean that they could pass a lie detector test but the bottom value is that the LDS prophets do not have to practice lying to be defined as liars. If the doctrines and teachings that they “believe are true” are proven incorrect they will be judged as spreading and promoting Untruth. How the LDS leaders and congregation members reconcile these incorrect teachings among themselves and society will prove very interesting to this poster.

I agree that it's a bad thing to spread a falsehood, either intentionally or unintentionally. But one is certainly less culpable than the other.

 

[Scott C.]

And it doesn't bother you at all that NONE of the prophets of the Bible were elected in this manner?

I believe this is the way Jesus chose the Twelve Apostles.

 

[cardero]

BalanceFX writes: Overall I ignore claims of prophets. Its contradicting to many other people, assumes many things for which after 100s of years we still have no proof of and seems pointless to even debate.

I find the claims of any prophet to be interesting and I continue to try to be respectful of everyone's beliefs, which is why I try to reach out towards others to help them learn how to compare other possibilities and to re-examine and re-evaluate their beliefs. This cannot be done when every religion displays different philosophies and are hardened to the belief that they have the Truth.

 

[tomspug]

I believe this is the way Jesus chose the Twelve Apostles.

None of whom were considered prophets in the Bible, with the exception of John.

 

[Scott C.]

And if you are right there would be far more deceived... If that far larger number is acceptable, why is your 15 over the years "inconceivable"?

Take Russell Nelson, for example. He was a practicing heart surgeon when he was called to the Quorum of the Twelve. I don't remember what church calling he had at the time, but he was not a "General Authority". Unless the Spirit told him to get ready for the calling, he would not have seen it coming or have known that he was being considered. That is really the way it works.

 

[cardero]

I agree that it's a bad thing to spread a falsehood, either intentionally or unintentionally. But one is certainly less culpable than the other.

Like I mentioned it will be very interesting to see what people think or how they will react when this moment comes.