Divine Investiture

[Rob Osborn]

24 minutes ago, CV75 said:

Yes, I mentioned Jesus' baptism, His appearance to the Nephites, and the First Vision in a post above: Posted 6 hours ago These were not direct, one-on-one exchanges between God and one of His children, as in an intimate conversation.

I understood your mentioning only a “possibility,” but I am still asking where that idea might have come from, since the explanations I brought up seem to point to the impossibility of unmediated communication with God the Father.

Someone can be transfigured or quickened to see God the Father, and Stephen saw Him in vision, seemingly quickened only in his spiritual mind. I also take “God” in D&C 67:11-13 to refer to Jesus, and that Moses saw and conversed with Him and not the Father in this way (Moses 1:11) for the reasons explained in the Alma verses I shared.

We cannot have direct spirit-to-Spirit communication with Heavenly Father while in the flesh either, because we are in the same fallen state spiritually as we are physically; we cannot enjoy direct spiritual communion with Him for we are spiritually dead. There is no physical or spiritual medium through which to do this, for we are cut off from His Person (His inseparably connected Spirit and Element) both physically and spiritually. We do have the hope that we will one day come into the Church of the Firstborn and enjoy a fullness of physical and spiritual life with the Father. But in the meantime, through His mercy, He operates through the media of the light of Christ and the power and gift of the Holy Ghost, availed to us exclusively through the merits of Christ. This is why we must do and receive all spiritual blessings possible in this life through and in the name of Jesus.

There simply is no direct access to and from the Father, only that fullness which is offered through Jesus. To act otherwise is to deny Jesus and to commune with someone who also denies Him and pretends to be the greater god.

If we are saying a lot of the same thing, there is no false doctrine in divine investiture of authority.

We, as born again Christians, are not spiritually dead. Spiritual death is being dead to the things of righteousness. Through repentance and baptism we are born again to the things of the spirit.

[Anddenex]

31 minutes ago, CV75 said:

Yes, I mentioned Jesus' baptism, His appearance to the Nephites, and the First Vision in a post above: Posted 6 hours ago These were not direct, one-on-one exchanges between God and one of His children, as in an intimate conversation.

I understood your mentioning only a “possibility,” but I am still asking where that idea might have come from, since the explanations I brought up seem to point to the impossibility of unmediated communication with God the Father.

Someone can be transfigured or quickened to see God the Father, and Stephen saw Him in vision, seemingly quickened only in his spiritual mind. I also take “God” in D&C 67:11-13 to refer to Jesus, and that Moses saw and conversed with Him and not the Father in this way (Moses 1:11) for the reasons explained in the Alma verses I shared.

What inhibits a person from communing with the Father? This is sin. If a person has come to the point of trial and overcome, I see no reason why the Father couldn't communicate intimately with his children. We are his children.

Found the source that, to me, provides the possibility of communing with the Father. "The scriptures speak of two Comforters. The first is the Holy Ghost (John 14:26–27; Moro. 8:26; D&C 21:9; 42:17; 90:11). The Second Comforter is the Lord Jesus Christ (John 14:18, 21, 23). When someone obtains the Second Comforter, Jesus Christ will appear to him from time to time, will reveal the Father, and will teach him face to face (D&C 130:3)." (Source)

John 14:23, "Jesus answered and said unto him, If a man love me, he will keep my words: and my Father will love him, and we will come unto him, and make our abode with him." What does it mean that even the Father will make his abode with him who has received the Second Comforter (part or is the calling and election made sure, I would say part of)?

Eternal Life is to know God and Jesus Christ. If a person obtains their calling and election made sure, and have received the Second Comforter do they only know God the Father through Christ (because they know Christ), or do they become intimately acquainted with him also? They are no longer inhibited by the Fall - Spiritual death - as long as they remain faithful to the end.

 

[JohnsonJones]

3 hours ago, Anddenex said:

What inhibits a person from communing with the Father? This is sin. If a person has come to the point of trial and overcome, I see no reason why the Father couldn't communicate intimately with his children. We are his children.

Found the source that, to me, provides the possibility of communing with the Father. "The scriptures speak of two Comforters. The first is the Holy Ghost (John 14:26–27; Moro. 8:26; D&C 21:9; 42:17; 90:11). The Second Comforter is the Lord Jesus Christ (John 14:18, 21, 23). When someone obtains the Second Comforter, Jesus Christ will appear to him from time to time, will reveal the Father, and will teach him face to face (D&C 130:3)." (Source)

John 14:23, "Jesus answered and said unto him, If a man love me, he will keep my words: and my Father will love him, and we will come unto him, and make our abode with him." What does it mean that even the Father will make his abode with him who has received the Second Comforter (part or is the calling and election made sure, I would say part of)?

Eternal Life is to know God and Jesus Christ. If a person obtains their calling and election made sure, and have received the Second Comforter do they only know God the Father through Christ (because they know Christ), or do they become intimately acquainted with him also? They are no longer inhibited by the Fall - Spiritual death - as long as they remain faithful to the end.

 

A LOT of questions there.  I think I have answers to them, but unsure if that's what you are really wanting.  In addition, I'm not sure how much of it I would want to go into here, as there are many that do not even understand some of the basic ordinances, and as some of this deals with temple ordinances, I'm unsure how much is even appropriate to discuss here.

A side point, I think John 14:23 is also talking about having the Gift of the Holy ghost, as is revealed in his answer to Judas in verse 26 in continuation of this.  It may also mean the second comforter, but I also feel it is discussing that gift which any one who loves the Father and the Son and have followed their commandments of baptism and receiving the gift of the Holy ghost may have.  it will also teach us all things, and help us to know the truth within them.

Calling and Election made sure (in this life) is an interesting topic, but ironically I do not believe it requires one to personally know the Father (In my opinion) as a person of and in the flesh in physical contact.  One can receive this as ordinance in the temple, though it is not practiced nor given as often today as it has in time past.  This may be off topic though and going a little too far off into the hinterlands to really be something we should discuss.

Edited January 9, 2018 by JohnsonJones

[Anddenex]

1 hour ago, JohnsonJones said:

A LOT of questions there.  I think I have answers to them, but unsure if that's what you are really wanting.  In addition, I'm not sure how much of it I would want to go into here, as there are many that do not even understand some of the basic ordinances, and as some of this deals with temple ordinances, I'm unsure how much is even appropriate to discuss here.

A side point, I think John 14:23 is also talking about having the Gift of the Holy ghost, as is revealed in his answer to Judas in verse 26 in continuation of this.  It may also mean the second comforter, but I also feel it is discussing that gift which any one who loves the Father and the Son and have followed their commandments of baptism and receiving the gift of the Holy ghost may have.  it will also teach us all things, and help us to know the truth within them.

Calling and Election made sure (in this life) is an interesting topic, but ironically I do not believe it requires one to personally know the Father (In my opinion) as a person of and in the flesh in physical contact.  One can receive this as ordinance in the temple, though it is not practiced nor given as often today as it has in time past.  This may be off topic though and going a little too far off into the hinterlands to really be something we should discuss.

Yes, there were questions (three to be precise), but not sure that would be "A LOT" of questions. The first question answers itself - sin. Answers that require temple discussion are probably inappropriate (not saying anything you don't already know), unless (as I understand) it is discussed through scripture as we have scripture in the temple ordinances. The questions were both introspective, and open to answers.

John 14:23 is directly associated with the Second Comforter source at lds.org. I would venture to say this scripture is talking about both. Lds.org in source topics refers this scripture as evidence to the second comforter. In correlation with what you have given I wouldn't disagree that it references the Holy Ghost. Understanding the Holy Ghost, how he delivers truth (the spirit of prophecy and revelation) is what will bring man or woman to a more sure word of prophecy, leading a man/woman to the second comforter.

I also don't believe a person's calling and election made sure requires one to personally know the Father. The scripture shared states that Eternal Life is to know both the Father (God) and Jesus Christ. We can know the Father by knowing the Son as these scriptures give insight to:

"And these things will they do unto you, because they have not ^aknown the Father, nor me."

"As the Father knoweth me, even so ^aknow I the Father:"

"Then said they unto him, Where is thy Father? Jesus answered, Ye neither know me, nor my Father: if ye had known me, ye should have known my Father also."

"Philip saith unto him, Lord, shew us the Father, and it sufficeth us. Jesus saith unto him, Have I been so long time with you, and yet hast thou not known me, Philip? he that hath seen me hath seen the Father; and how sayest thou then, Shew us the Father?"

In light of these scriptures, it appears that through knowing Christ we know the Father, and in light of the Second Comforter we are informed that Jesus can and will "reveal the Father," if it be according to their will, as they are one.

The statement I responded to was that the Father (God the Father) would not communicate intimately with his children, except through his Son. I find the option within the Second Comforter to give evidence that the Father can (and is able to) communicate directly with his children the same way Christ does, and it appears the Second Comforter and our calling and election are the pathway to this. Thus one of the questions, "What does it mean that even the Father will make his abode with him who has received the Second Comforter"? Another question that wasn't asked but could be asked, "What does it mean that the Lord will 'reveal his Father'"? Thus, the scriptures and doctrine appear to give possibility that the Father will indeed communicate intimately with his children, if his children have obeyed the predicated law that gives the blessing.

The questions were both introspective and answerable.

Edited January 9, 2018 by Anddenex

[CV75]

13 hours ago, Rob Osborn said:

We, as born again Christians, are not spiritually dead. Spiritual death is being dead to the things of righteousness. Through repentance and baptism we are born again to the things of the spirit.

The point is, you are not as spiritually alive as you need to be to have a two-way, face-to-face, personal interview with Heavenly Father. Until that day arrives you are dependent on the Savior as your Mediator and Advocate, are you not? The verses in Alma bear this out.

Little children are alive in Christ, and are under no condemnation, yet they require as much redemption from the Fall as any of us, which is why it had to be prepared from the foundation of the world. So do those with their calling and election made sure.  “And moreover, I say unto you, that there shall be no other name given nor any other way nor means whereby salvation [communion in the presence of the Father] can come unto the children of men, only in and through the name of Christ, the Lord Omnipotent.” (Mosiah 3:17).

I think most telling is that you haven’t provided an example of where you have spoken directly with Heavenly Father, and He to you. Posted 21 hours ago

12 hours ago, Anddenex said:

What inhibits a person from communing with the Father? This is sin. If a person has come to the point of trial and overcome, I see no reason why the Father couldn't communicate intimately with his children. We are his children.

Found the source that, to me, provides the possibility of communing with the Father. "The scriptures speak of two Comforters. The first is the Holy Ghost (John 14:26–27; Moro. 8:26; D&C 21:9; 42:17; 90:11). The Second Comforter is the Lord Jesus Christ (John 14:18, 21, 23). When someone obtains the Second Comforter, Jesus Christ will appear to him from time to time, will reveal the Father, and will teach him face to face (D&C 130:3)." (Source)

John 14:23, "Jesus answered and said unto him, If a man love me, he will keep my words: and my Father will love him, and we will come unto him, and make our abode with him." What does it mean that even the Father will make his abode with him who has received the Second Comforter (part or is the calling and election made sure, I would say part of)?

Eternal Life is to know God and Jesus Christ. If a person obtains their calling and election made sure, and have received the Second Comforter do they only know God the Father through Christ (because they know Christ), or do they become intimately acquainted with him also? They are no longer inhibited by the Fall - Spiritual death - as long as they remain faithful to the end.

But we as sinners do commune with the Father through Christ; He hears and guides us no matter how craven and depraved we have become as long as we exercise a desire to believe or a particle of faith.

Thank you for the scripture references, but unfortunately, once charges of “false doctrine” have been cast, there is no room to tolerate mere possibilities. I do not think these references point to the Second Comforter and the Father coming to live with you in your house, but to a future fulfillment in the Church of the Firstborn. The only way to the Father is through Christ, and I haven’t seen any explanations or examples to the contrary.

I think you need to become more acquainted with what calling and election is; there are plenty of lds.org resources. I double-checked them before replying to you here: Posted 19 hours ago

---

Between the two of you, one can commune directly with the Father only if he is without sin (but none was sinless in this world but Christ--calling and election notwithstanding), and the other seemingly has not commend directly with Him, through as a born-again Christian he is spiritually alive

[Rob Osborn]

59 minutes ago, CV75 said:

The point is, you are not as spiritually alive as you need to be to have a two-way, face-to-face, personal interview with Heavenly Father. Until that day arrives you are dependent on the Savior as your Mediator and Advocate, are you not? The verses in Alma bear this out.

 

Little children are alive in Christ, and are under no condemnation, yet they require as much redemption from the Fall as any of us, which is why it had to be prepared from the foundation of the world. So do those with their calling and election made sure.  “And moreover, I say unto you, that there shall be no other name given nor any other way nor means whereby salvation [communion in the presence of the Father] can come unto the children of men, only in and through the name of Christ, the Lord Omnipotent.” (Mosiah 3:17).

 

I think most telling is that you haven’t provided an example of where you have spoken directly with Heavenly Father, and He to you. Posted 21 hours ago

 

But we as sinners do commune with the Father through Christ; He hears and guides us no matter how craven and depraved we have become as long as we exercise a desire to believe or a particle of faith.

 

Thank you for the scripture references, but unfortunately, once charges of “false doctrine” have been cast, there is no room to tolerate mere possibilities. I do not think these references point to the Second Comforter and the Father coming to live with you in your house, but to a future fulfillment in the Church of the Firstborn. The only way to the Father is through Christ, and I haven’t seen any explanations or examples to the contrary.

 

I think you need to become more acquainted with what calling and election is; there are plenty of lds.org resources. I double-checked them before replying to you here: Posted 19 hours ago

---

Between the two of you, one can commune directly with the Father only if he is without sin (but none was sinless in this world but Christ--calling and election notwithstanding), and the other seemingly has not commend directly with Him, through as a born-again Christian he is spiritually alive

 

 

I agree that a face to literal face communication with Heavenly Father probably isnt going to happen for the majority of mankind. Then again, neither is a literal face to face communication with Jesus Christ going to happen either. But, we really do communicate personally with our Heavenly Father and he communicates personally with us.

[Anddenex]

1 hour ago, CV75 said:

The point is, you are not as spiritually alive as you need to be to have a two-way, face-to-face, personal interview with Heavenly Father. Until that day arrives you are dependent on the Savior as your Mediator and Advocate, are you not? The verses in Alma bear this out.

 

Little children are alive in Christ, and are under no condemnation, yet they require as much redemption from the Fall as any of us, which is why it had to be prepared from the foundation of the world. So do those with their calling and election made sure.  “And moreover, I say unto you, that there shall be no other name given nor any other way nor means whereby salvation [communion in the presence of the Father] can come unto the children of men, only in and through the name of Christ, the Lord Omnipotent.” (Mosiah 3:17).

 

I think most telling is that you haven’t provided an example of where you have spoken directly with Heavenly Father, and He to you. Posted 21 hours ago

 

But we as sinners do commune with the Father through Christ; He hears and guides us no matter how craven and depraved we have become as long as we exercise a desire to believe or a particle of faith.

 

Thank you for the scripture references, but unfortunately, once charges of “false doctrine” have been cast, there is no room to tolerate mere possibilities. I do not think these references point to the Second Comforter and the Father coming to live with you in your house, but to a future fulfillment in the Church of the Firstborn. The only way to the Father is through Christ, and I haven’t seen any explanations or examples to the contrary.

 

I think you need to become more acquainted with what calling and election is; there are plenty of lds.org resources. I double-checked them before replying to you here: Posted 19 hours ago

---

Between the two of you, one can commune directly with the Father only if he is without sin (but none was sinless in this world but Christ--calling and election notwithstanding), and the other seemingly has not commend directly with Him, through as a born-again Christian he is spiritually alive

 

 

I am good with this. This is your personal opinion on the subject matter given. No false doctrine, you are welcome to your opinion and thoughts. If you think it is false doctrine, I am not offended by your lack.

No one is denying that the way to the Father is through Christ, you are implying words that aren't said, which is poor judgement. I am acquainted with a calling and election made sure, but thank you for your condescending tone and nature, but you are incorrect. You may want to take your own advice.

If a person is covered by the Atonement of Christ they are perfect through him, without sin, otherwise we could not enter his presence. It appears you need to take your own advice and study Moroni 10:32-34 a little more.

" I do not think these references point to the Second Comforter and the Father coming to live with you in your house" It is obvious you didn't pay attention to the source of the quote. It is from lds.org, which you like to say to check out sources from (which is good), and then deny the source from lds.org. The source of the quote and scriptures provided come from the topic Comforter on lds.org. Since it comes from the topic of Comforter (which specifically introduces those verses in relation to the Second Comforter and statements), and you don't think it points to it, I can't help you there if you want to deny it, and its source. Here is a picture since you seem to want to avoid the connection from lds.org. Kinda hard to deny what the Church, lds.org, put forth as scriptures for the Second Comforter which you give an opinion, "I don't think...," but obviously the Church does.

But as you seek to condescend, I don't have any need to speak further on the topic, as you didn't address what was given, just continued with your opinion and then try to appear more studied. That is OK, but not worth any further discussion.

EDIT: And by the way, this is nonsense, "I think most telling is that you haven’t provided an example of where you have spoken directly with Heavenly Father, and He to you." If I had spoken with the Father, Heavenly Father, personally why would I give a personal example. That would be a private and personal revelation which wouldn't be spoken or written. Oh my! This statement wasn't well thought through.

 

Edited January 9, 2018 by Anddenex

[Guest]

Quote

“All revelation since the fall has come through Jesus Christ, who is the Jehovah of the Old Testament. … He is the God of Israel, the Holy One of Israel; the one who led that nation out of Egyptian bondage, and who gave and fulfilled the Law of Moses. The Father has never dealt with man directly and personally since the fall, and he has never appeared except to introduce and bear record of the Son.”  

Doctrines of Salvation, 1:27

 

[Rob Osborn]

Just now, Carborendum said:

 

I believe that isnt true. The very essence and nature of prayer is developing a personal communication and relationship with our Heavenly Father.

[Guest]

3 minutes ago, Carborendum said:

"The Father has never dealt with man directly and personally since the fall, and he has never appeared except to introduce and bear record of the Son.”  

Doctrines of Salvation, 1:27

Just now, Rob Osborn said:

I believe that isnt true.

Wow.  A Prophet (Joseph Fielding Smith) declares this, it is repeated by many apostles and prophets.  It is used in all our curricula.  And you don't believe it's true.  Sometimes I don't know what drives you.

[Rob Osborn]

45 minutes ago, Carborendum said:

Wow.  A Prophet (Joseph Fielding Smith) declares this, it is repeated by many apostles and prophets.  It is used in all our curricula.  And you don't believe it's true.  Sometimes I don't know what drives you.

Whi do you pray to?

[Guest]

1 minute ago, Rob Osborn said:

Whi do you pray to?

[Rob Osborn]

Who did Jesus pray to when he was on the earth? Did he not command us to do exactly likewise and pray also directly to our Heavenly Father?

[CV75]

1 hour ago, Rob Osborn said:

I agree that a face to literal face communication with Heavenly Father probably isnt going to happen for the majority of mankind. Then again, neither is a literal face to face communication with Jesus Christ going to happen either. But, we really do communicate personally with our Heavenly Father and he communicates personally with us.

You haven't provided examples. Prayer is not an example because it is not structured as a direct communication between us and Heavenly Father. Jesus Christ is the name or power in which we pray to the Father, and the power of the Holy Ghost is the medium through which we pray and ask, and receive responses and answers. It is false doctrine to teach otherwise. Prayer might be construed as direct only because of the close relationship between the Father, Son and Holy Ghost, which gets into the practice of divine investiture of authority, but this is neither face to face nor direct.

1 hour ago, Anddenex said:

I am good with this. This is your personal opinion on the subject matter given. No false doctrine, you are welcome to your opinion and thoughts. If you think it is false doctrine, I am not offended by your lack.

No one is denying that the way to the Father is through Christ, you are implying words that aren't said, which is poor judgement. I am acquainted with a calling and election made sure, but thank you for your condescending tone and nature, but you are incorrect. You may want to take your own advice.

If a person is covered by the Atonement of Christ they are perfect through him, without sin, otherwise we could not enter his presence. It appears you need to take your own advice and study Moroni 10:32-34 a little more.

" I do not think these references point to the Second Comforter and the Father coming to live with you in your house" It is obvious you didn't pay attention to the source of the quote. It is from lds.org, which you like to say to check out sources from (which is good), and then deny the source from lds.org. The source of the quote and scriptures provided come from the topic Comforter on lds.org. Since it comes from the topic of Comforter (which specifically introduces those verses in relation to the Second Comforter and statements), and you don't think it points to it, I can't help you there if you want to deny it, and its source. Here is a picture since you seem to want to avoid the connection from lds.org. Kinda hard to deny what the Church, lds.org, put forth as scriptures for the Second Comforter which you give an opinion, "I don't think...," but obviously the Church does.

But as you seek to condescend, I don't have any need to speak further on the topic, as you didn't address what was given, just continued with your opinion and then try to appear more studied. That is OK, but not worth any further discussion.

EDIT: And by the way, this is nonsense, "I think most telling is that you haven’t provided an example of where you have spoken directly with Heavenly Father, and He to you." If I had spoken with the Father, Heavenly Father, personally why would I give a personal example. That would be a private and personal revelation which wouldn't be spoken or written. Oh my! This statement wasn't well thought through.

 

I'm not sure what I am misapplying from your comments. You are saying that we can have a face to face exchange with the Father while yet in the flesh should the Second Comforter reveal Him to us. You justify this with D&C 130:3 (there is more lds.org than just this; I just didn't want to sidetrack over calling and election).

D&C 130:3 was given to explain John 14:23 ("Jesus answered and said unto him, If a man love me, he will keep my words: and my Father will love him, and we will come unto him, and make our abode with him."). As I explained, this abode is not in the heart, but in the future heaven and not any earthly abode. In terms of Jesus revealing the Father when in His role as Second Comforter, Jesus  reveals the Father as follows: "And he that seeth me seeth him that sent me" (John 12:45), because the Risen Lord Jesus does indeed physically appear to that person. This appearance serving the purpose of revealing the Father is another example of divine investiture of authority.

As far as my remark about not giving an example, that was for Rob to address. I take it from your answer that you have not spoken with Heavenly Father in the face to face manner that you have suggested could possibly be done (and which I say is not consistent with the order of things).

 

[CV75]

4 minutes ago, Rob Osborn said:

Who did Jesus pray to when he was on the earth? Did he not command us to do exactly likewise and pray also directly to our Heavenly Father?

Prayer is not an example because it is not structured as a direct communication between us and Heavenly Father. Jesus Christ is the name or power in which we pray to the Father, and the power of the Holy Ghost is the medium through which we pray and ask, and receive responses and answers. It is false doctrine to teach otherwise. Prayer might be construed as direct only because of the close relationship between the Father, Son and Holy Ghost, which gets into the practice of divine investiture of authority, but this is neither face to face nor direct. What you have been proposing is unmediated, unassisted communication.

[zil]

20 minutes ago, CV75 said:

Prayer is not an example because it is not structured as a direct communication between us and Heavenly Father. Jesus Christ is the name or power in which we pray to the Father, and the power of the Holy Ghost is the medium through which we pray and ask

A) We know that God knows all - and only he can read our thoughts (though I interpret this as all of the Godhead).

B) I was always taught that we speak directly to God - He hears us because he knows everything.  I have never heard anyone teach that it is the Holy Ghost who hears our prayers and transfers / carries them to the Father - that is, the upward path doesn't need this medium (see D).  (In other words, God doesn't need the HG to act as translator.)

You seem to be implying the HG acts as the communication medium in both directions and I've never heard that, and I don't think I believe it.

C) Christ acts as our mediator, intervening on our behalf - essentially, we make our request invoking our faith in Christ as the reason that our prayer should be heard / considered.

D) We receive the response via the Holy Ghost - he is the one who brings the answer to us. (In other words, we need the HG to act as translator.)

Interestingly, a quick search makes me think this structured version of how prayer works (we speak to the Father, Christ mediates, the answer comes through the Holy Ghost) doesn't seem to exist in manuals any longer.  I suppose it could be a false memory on my part, but that's what my memory says was taught.

[Vort]

52 minutes ago, zil said:

B) I was always taught that we speak directly to God - He hears us because he knows everything.  I have never heard anyone teach that it is the Holy Ghost who hears our prayers and transfers / carries them to the Father - that is, the upward path doesn't need this medium (see D).  (In other words, God doesn't need the HG to act as translator.)

Elder McConkie was bluntly clear on this matter:

Quote

[False heretical idea] Because the Savior is our mediator, our prayers go through Christ to the Father, and the Father answers our prayers through his Son.

This is plain sectarian nonsense. Our prayers are addressed to the Father, and to him only. They do not go through Christ, or the Blessed Virgin, or St. Genevieve or along the beads of a rosary. We are entitled to “come boldly unto the throne of grace, that we may obtain mercy, and find grace to help in time of need” (Hebrews 4:16).

And I rather suppose that he who sitteth upon the throne will choose his own ways to answer his children, and that they are numerous. Perfect prayer is addressed to the Father, in the name of the Son; and it is uttered by the power of the Holy Ghost; and it is answered in whatever way seems proper by him whose ear is attuned to the needs of his children.

However you may feel about Elder McConkie, he didn't normally leave you wondering where he stood on an issue.

Edited January 9, 2018 by Vort

[CV75]

1 hour ago, zil said:

A) We know that God knows all - and only he can read our thoughts (though I interpret this as all of the Godhead).

B) I was always taught that we speak directly to God - He hears us because he knows everything.  I have never heard anyone teach that it is the Holy Ghost who hears our prayers and transfers / carries them to the Father - that is, the upward path doesn't need this medium (see D).  (In other words, God doesn't need the HG to act as translator.)

You seem to be implying the HG acts as the communication medium in both directions and I've never heard that, and I don't think I believe it.

C) Christ acts as our mediator, intervening on our behalf - essentially, we make our request invoking our faith in Christ as the reason that our prayer should be heard / considered.

D) We receive the response via the Holy Ghost - he is the one who brings the answer to us. (In other words, we need the HG to act as translator.)

Interestingly, a quick search makes me think this structured version of how prayer works (we speak to the Father, Christ mediates, the answer comes through the Holy Ghost) doesn't seem to exist in manuals any longer.  I suppose it could be a false memory on my part, but that's what my memory says was taught.

I agree that God can read our thoughts no matter how profane or virtuous they are, and whether we are praying or not, but I am approaching this topic from the standpoint that we have a poster or two asserting that direct personal face-to-face revelation from Heavenly Father proves that divine investiture of authority is a false doctrine.

With this in mind, regarding your point B, the idea that the Holy Ghost is the medium through we pray and ask (as well as receive responses and answers), comes from https://www.lds.org/topics/prayer?lang=eng : “The Holy Ghost can teach us to pray and guide us in the things we say (see Romans 8:26; 2 Nephi 32:8; 3 Nephi 19:9, 24). He can help us pray “according to the will of God” (D&C 46:30).”

A “profane” prayer would only distance ourselves from God, who can read our thoughts anyway, but who would intentionally pray in a manner that would offend the Holy Ghost?

Having our calling and election made sure was one evidence presented to show that we can speak directly with the Father, face-to-face, in the flesh. But that blessing of calling and election made sure is only the promise, assurance or guarantee of future exaltation, and not the realization of exaltation wherein one does indeed come face-to-face and commune with Heavenly Father. This has nothing to do with either divine investiture of authority or direct, face-to-face revelation from Heavenly father.

The Second Comforter revealing the Father was used as another evidence, but this refers to the appearance of Jesus to someone wherein Jesus can manifest the Father to him (as in vision or according to John 12:45). But this does not constitute a direct, face-to-face communion with the Father. And I’m not seeing the relationship between a personal appearance by Jesus and divine investiture of authority here, unless He speaks as the Father, which he is known to do.

Prayer does not entail in a direct, face-to-face communion with the Father because of the way we are taught to pray, and roles or order of the Three members of the Godhead therein. Prayer supports divine investiture of authority in that Jesus enables the prayer to rise to heaven and the Holy Ghost conveys the Father’s will, speaking to us as if He were the Father. When we pray to know the truth of the Book of Mormon, for example, the Father manifests answers by the power of the Holy Ghost (Moroni 10:4), but this is not face-to-face communion with the Father.

I gave some verses from Alma that explain why face-to-face communion with the Father is not the order of things for us mortals since the Fall, and why we rely on prayer and why Jesus and the Holy Ghost employ divine investiture of authority to speak as the father.

@Rob Osborn and @Anddenex, does this summary make sense, and provide better context for why i reply the way I do?

Edited January 9, 2018 by CV75

[zil]

1 minute ago, CV75 said:

With this in mind, regarding your point B, the idea that the Holy Ghost is the medium through we pray and ask (as well as receive responses and answers), comes from https://www.lds.org/topics/prayer?lang=eng : “The Holy Ghost can teach us to pray and guide us in the things we say (see Romans 8:26; 2 Nephi 32:8; 3 Nephi 19:9, 24). He can help us pray “according to the will of God” (D&C 46:30).”

OK, no worries.  I was thinking of it differently than how you (or Elder McConkie) put it.  I'm OK with this.  I didn't want to get involved in the rest of the discussion, just the personal prayer part, which sounded different from what I had always heard.

[Rob Osborn]

1 hour ago, CV75 said:

Prayer is not an example because it is not structured as a direct communication between us and Heavenly Father. Jesus Christ is the name or power in which we pray to the Father, and the power of the Holy Ghost is the medium through which we pray and ask, and receive responses and answers. It is false doctrine to teach otherwise. Prayer might be construed as direct only because of the close relationship between the Father, Son and Holy Ghost, which gets into the practice of divine investiture of authority, but this is neither face to face nor direct. What you have been proposing is unmediated, unassisted communication.

Could you provide an official current up to date manual of the church that teaches this process of prayer and how we communicate that you are proposing?

It have always been interesting to me of the account of Moses speaking with God as found in the book 9f Moses. Church manuals seem to always invoke this divine investiture to explain its actually Jesus Christ speaking here with Moses and not the Father. Opinions aside, can you show where in Moses ch.1 that it is Jesus speaking to Moses and not the Father?

[NeedleinA]

12 minutes ago, Rob Osborn said:

Church manuals seem to always invoke this divine investiture to explain its actually Jesus Christ speaking here with Moses and not the Father.

Are the Church manuals wrong?

[Guest]

1 minute ago, NeedleinA said:

Are the Church manuals wrong?

Get it straight.  Any time anything (or anyone) disagrees with Rob, it (or they) are wrong.

[Rob Osborn]

15 minutes ago, NeedleinA said:

Are the Church manuals wrong?

I am wonderi g just how and why this doctrine exists. Im not saying its completely wrong but there is some principle taught with it that raises red flags in my heart, something fishy going on. 

[NeedleinA]

@Rob Osborn D&C 49. Who is speaking here?

Quote

5 Thus saith the Lord; for I am God, and have sent mine Only Begotten Son into the world for the redemption of the world,

 

[NeedleinA]

Hint: D&C 49 answers it -

Quote

28 Behold, I am Jesus Christ, and I come quickly. Even so. Amen.