Infallibility of a prophet: Nathan

[MrShorty]

I read the account last night of David and his desire to build the temple (1 Chr 17, see also 2 Sam 7). The thing that stood out to me was how Nathan responded to David's "request." Initially (v. 2), Nathan's response was definite approval of the idea. That night, God, in a dream, tells Nathan to go back to David and tell him that he should not build the temple.

What I found interesting was Nathan's initial response. The accounts don't allow us to go back and really see the tone of the discussion. It is clear from this and other ways that David and Nathan interact, that Nathan is an official representative (prophet) for God to David. It would seem reasonable that, when David asks Nathan if he should build the temple, he is expecting that Nathan's response will be God's response. Nathan, for his part, appears to respond authoritatively -- "Do [it], for God is with thee." He doesn't respond with "I don't see why not." or "Sounds like a good idea to me." or other uncertain response, nor does he respond "I don't know if God approves, let me pray about it and get back with you." God doesn't intervene immediately and tell Nathan before he has a chance to respond that he shouldn't approve the project.

So, was Nathan inspired in his first response? Probably not, though it certainly seems like the best "first" answer. It would appear that God allowed his prophet to respond as Nathan deemed best, then corrected him later.

From the other angle, David could have responded to Nathan's 2nd visit with something like, "Yesterday, you said I should build the temple, and today you are saying that I shouldn't!? What kind of prophet are you?!" Instead David accpets Nathan's second pronouncement and continues to accept Nathan.

I guess this stood out to me because we sometimes discuss issues where previous presidents of the church promoted one practice/policy, and later prophets change those. Sometimes we get critical of the previous prophet (or the current prophet depending on which side of the issue our personal feelings lie). Perhaps our thoughts should focus on what is being said now, while allowing for the possibility that previous prophets were speaking for their day/circumstance or according to their best knowledge at the time and not get too hung up on the "change" that occurred.

[RMGuy]

I think to we as members need to understand that a prophets role is guide and direct. By design his role is to speak to the world (not just the church) about the reality of the Gospel generally, and to testify of Christ specifically.

We have heard that sometimes an individual can speak as a prophet and sometimes as a man. Personally I think that can even be expanded upon:

1. An individual called to be President of the Church and a Prophet, Seer, and Revelator does not give up their ability to speak as an individual, nor do they give up their own opinions, biases, or prejudices. They are still human beings, men, who can make mistakes. There is no difference between this and the opinion of your home teacher, or the guy in the next cubicle at work (as it relates to the commandment or salvation) it is simply and by definition the opinion of man.

2. Opinion - even as a Prophet there have been times when an individual has given an opinion. In fact, we know from the minutes of meetings of the 12 that there is often significant debate regarding principles and doctrine even among this August group of Prophets. Clearly they are inspired and are seeking the will of the Lord. They are inspired, but they are voicing opinion. In my view the weakest of the inspired counsels.

3. Advice - sometimes even when speaking under the mantle of Prophet, what they give us is advice. Good advice no doubt, but advice none the less. This can be construed as general guidance to the world as a whole, and you will generally find benefit in following it. However, it might not be helpful for every member or non-member of the church.

4. Policy - the has been tested enough and the Brethren are comfortable enough with this direction to commit it to writing. It becomes a base line guide for the church as a whole, but is still not necessarily unchanging and eternal truth. We can all think of instances in which policy has changed. While we should be living the policies of the church, in my opinion, it is important to distinguish these from the next level but one of these levels.

5. Principles - This is what guides policy. And it is here that I think we really begin to touch the Divine. Principles are underlying doctrines that guide policy, advice, and opinion. For me personally President Hinckley's thoughts on more than one pair of earrings would fall in the category of either opinion or advice. It clearly isn't policy. But it IS predicated on the principle that the body is sacred and should be treated with respect. In this instance opinion or advice is clearly guided by principle.

6. Commandments - it is rare to hear a prophet of the Lord stand up to declare "Thus saith the Lord" or anything like it. However, it is clearly their responsibility and right to do so. And when they so declare, in my opinion, we have elevated to a different level. Of course, the most common example is that of the 10 commandments brought down from the Mountain, yet there are many others. These commandments guide everything else except....

7. Eternal truth (gospel) - How does anything trump commandment? We need look no farther than Abraham with Isaac, or Nephi and Laban. Both of whom either did, or were willing to break the prohibition regarding thou shalt not kill. We have all heard the statement, when the Lord commands, do it. That probably falls into the realms of eternal truth!

Yet this is where it can get difficult. There is not flag that gets waived to show us when a Prophet is speaking his mind or the will of the Lord, and if we don't know which is which it can be difficult. It can lead us to pray about a concept and get spiritual confirmation that the advice, or opinion is indeed true and binding and we can think that this then applies to the whole church, by way of commandment, when in reality it applies to us as an individual. It can lead to us perverting good counsel that was meant to edify and uplift us and lead us to judge or criticize or look askance at someone else who received a different answer.

Those are just my $.02

-RM

[Martain]

The following below is a quote from the speech "Fourteen Fundamentals in Following the Prophet" given by Ezra Taft Benson while he was a member of the Quorum of the Twelve Apostles on February 26, 1980.

"Sixth: The prophet does not have to say “Thus saith the Lord” to give us scripture.

Sometimes there are those who haggle over words. They might say the prophet gave us counsel but that we are not obligated to follow it unless he says it is a commandment. But the Lord says of the Prophet Joseph, “Thou shalt give heed unto all his words and commandments which he shall give unto you” (D&C 21:4; italics added).

And speaking of taking counsel from the prophet, in D&C 108:1, the Lord states: “Verily thus saith the Lord unto you, my servant Lyman: Your sins are forgiven you, because you have obeyed my voice in coming up hither this morning to receive counsel of him whom I have appointed” (italics added).

Said Brigham Young, “I have never yet preached a sermon and sent it out to the children of men, that they may not call scripture” (Journal of Discourses, 26 vols. [London: Latter-day Saints’ Book Depot], 13:95)."

These words were later reconfirmed in the 2010 October Conference under the speech Obedience to the Prophets.

In addition to having more content per each section, the original has some other interesting promises and prophecies and is well worth reading.

Edited November 13, 2011 by Martain

[Suzie]

Said Brigham Young, “I have never yet preached a sermon and sent it out to the children of men, that they may not call scripture” (Journal of Discourses, 26 vols. [London: Latter-day Saints’ Book Depot], 13:95)."

Does this mean that every sermon Brigham Young taught has to be considered scripture and prophetic declaration? (according to Pres. Benson? Since he quoted BY)

[Vort]

The following below is a quote from the speech "Fourteen Fundamentals in Following the Prophet" given by Ezra Taft Benson while he was a member of the Quorum of the Twelve Apostles on February 26, 1980.

These words were later reconfirmed in the 2010 October Conference under the speech Obedience to the Prophets.

Also a second time in that same General Conference by Kevin R. Duncan.

[annewandering]

If the prophet tells me to wear pantyhose I will even though I have lots of reasons to not wear them. It doesnt pay to nitpick over what prophets tell us. Sure what they say may be an opinion but its the opinion of a man who God trusted to be His spokesman on earth.

[Suzie]

It doesnt pay to nitpick over what prophets tell us. Sure what they say may be an opinion but its the opinion of a man who God trusted to be His spokesman on earth.

Is it really nitpicking or is it about knowing that prophets (as you said) do have opinions and it doesn't necessarily mean they may be always right in those opinions? Are personal opinions of prophets the same as prophetic declarations?

Don't you think it is important to obtain an answer for ourselves (whether is opinion or not) instead of just following for no other reason that a leader said so? Where do we draw the line between faithful obedience and blind obedience?

[annewandering]

Is it really nitpicking or is it about knowing that prophets (as you said) do have opinions and it doesn't necessarily mean they may be always right in those opinions? Are personal opinions of prophets the same as prophetic declarations?

Don't you think it is important to obtain an answer for ourselves (whether is opinion or not) instead of just following for no other reason that a leader said so? Where do we draw the line between faithful obedience and blind obedience?

It is always important to seek confirmation for ourselves. Isnt that a guiding principle in the gospel? I dont regard thinking and praying about things as nitpicking but dont you think that sometimes it is just that?

Perhaps the dividing line is to ask ourselves if we are questioning out of genuine confusion and desire to know or is it that we are seeking justification for ourselves to disregard the opinion or advice? Only we can know for ourselves what the truth is but it might be a worthwhile thing to add to our prayers.

Edited November 13, 2011 by annewandering

[Suzie]

It is always important to seek confirmation for ourselves.

For me, it's vital.

I dont regard thinking and praying about things as nitpicking but dont you think that sometimes it is just that?

I am not sure, I suppose in a lot of cases it is. However, I think some members of the Church do have a problem when some of us (heretics ) share the fact that Prophets are not infallible, that they do share opinions and that some of those opinions have been very controversial hence it is very important IMO, to use the right tools. I am all for obedience, for the right reasons and through the right method.

[Suzie]

Only we can know for ourselves what the truth is but it might be a worthwhile thing to add to our prayers.

I agree 100%.

[Justice]

These men have 6 months to ponder and consider their remarks, while I might add in full time Church service.

I haven't heard anything at a single conference that I wouldn't like to understand better or make a part of my life.

[Vort]

Where do we draw the line between faithful obedience and blind obedience?

Please point out to me the scriptural passages warning us against blind obedience to the prophets. Recent (say, within the last fifty years) General Conference teachings establishing this important point are equally acceptable.

[Martain]

Is it really nitpicking or is it about knowing that prophets (as you said) do have opinions and it doesn't necessarily mean they may be always right in those opinions? Are personal opinions of prophets the same as prophetic declarations?

Does this mean that every sermon Brigham Young taught has to be considered scripture and prophetic declaration? (according to Pres. Benson? Since he quoted BY)

You can get into trouble with the above statement. Not because the statement above is not true, but because our reports of such sermons are not always accurate.

So and so said that so and so told them that the Prophet Brigham Young said such and such.

Have you ever played the game Phone? It is very easy for the original message to get altered the more mouths it passes through.

Now if you find it in our current LDS church database found on LDS.Org, you can accept that the report has been validated as correct to the original. If you find it in a church publication that has gone through the correlation department, you can accept that the teachings are correct and in harmony with church doctrine.

The following is also a quote from the speech "Fourteen Fundamentals in Following the Prophet" given by Ezra Taft Benson while he was a member of the Quorum of the Twelve Apostles on February 26, 1980.

Fourth: The prophet will never lead the Church astray.

President Wilford Woodruff stated: “I say to Israel, The Lord will never permit me or any other man who stands as president of the Church to lead you astray. It is not in the program. It is not in the mind of God.” (The Discourses of Wilford Woodruff, selected by G. Homer Durham [salt Lake City: Bookcraft, 1946], pp. 212-213.)

President Marion G. Romney tells of this incident which happened to him:

I remember years ago when I was a Bishop I had President [Heber J.] Grant talk to our ward. After the meeting I drove him home. . . .Standing by me, he put his arm over my shoulder and said: “My boy, you always keep your eye on the President of the Church, and if he ever tells you to do anything, and it is wrong, and you do it, the Lord will bless you for it.” Then with a twinkle in his eye, he said, “But you don’t need to worry. The Lord will never let his mouthpiece lead the people astray.” [in Conference Report, October 1960, p. 78]

How is the question as to whether it is his opinion or not relevant? Either way, the Lord will bless us for obedience and we've been promised not to be led astray. If you haven't read the talk I reference above. It's still waiting for you.

[Guest gopecon]

I'll take the opinion and advice of a prophet over that of my home teacher any day of the week. I get pretty uncomfortable with this type of categorizing what prophets say. Yes, they can have their own opinions, but when they are speaking in conferences, or to the media I think that they try to be pretty careful about going out on a limb with doctrines. When in doubt, of course we can pray about it, but I don't think we need to be too skeptical about teachings coming from the prophets and apostles.

Now rumors about what they have said (my friend's sister's stake president said that a Seventy told them that Pres. Monson believes...) are another matter entirely...