New and old Revelation...

[inquirer_Jn1717]

I heard recently that only the words of the living LDS prophet were binding on Latter Day Saints, or in other words that a living prophet can overrule a past prophet. Is that true?

I also heard that President Hinckley passed away, so I send my condolences also.

[tree]

i am new so i wouldnt know anything about that. but one prophet over ruling another seems real iffy, if you know what i mean. tree

[NateHowe]

The words of the current Prophet are intended for our day specifically. New revelation can overrule the policies of the past, even those accepted by previous prophets. If we are to believe in Jesus Christ, this is not difficult to believe, because His words overruled Moses and previous Prophets. Similarly, the law God gave Moses was different from the revelations given to Adam and Noah.

A good example in modern times is the 1978 revelation that encouraged ordination of all worthy men to the Priesthood. It was granted for the time when it came. It was not the policy of previous Prophets, but it was given for a specific reason in the Lord.

[tubaloth]

I heard recently that only the words of the living LDS prophet were binding on Latter Day Saints

No thats not true, Prophets teachings are just that prophets teaching, they are words from God. Rejecting prophets words (or ignoring them) is ignoring God's words.

or in other words that a living prophet can overrule a past prophet. Is that true?

This is true in cases where prophets have taught about the same subject. New Reveleation Trumps old revelation (thats kind of the point of having a prophet). To be lead and guided by what we need to do today.

I good talk about this subject can be found by Pres Benson Fourteen Fundamentals in Following the Prophet

[inquirer_Jn1717]

Thank-you for the link tubaloth, and thank you both for answering my question. So it is true then that new revelation can overrule the old in the LDS church. As an outsider looking in I would have to echo tree's sentiment that it sounds a bit "iffy."

I would also challenge either of you on one point: did Jesus really overrule Moses or any prophet, if so on what point? Yes, He certainly ushered in a new covenant making the old obsolete (as prophesied in Jeremiah 31) but did he ever say anything to the effect: "Moses said this but now I tell you..." ?

[NeuroTypical]

I good talk about this subject can be found by Pres Benson Fourteen Fundamentals in Following the Prophet

I think I see what President Benson was trying to get at with these 14 points, but I must say I don't like the presentation very much. Too easily taken out of context and used to support notions that we LDS all march in unthinking lockstep to the beat of whatever whim comes from the prophet, or that we buy whatever newspeak contradicts last year's newspeak.

Of course his talk does none of these things, but unfortunately, a quote out of context here, a little stretch there, and it becomes what it isn't.

I much prefer quotes like these:

-------------------

I am more afraid that this people have so much confidence in their leaders that they will not inquire for themselves of God whether they are led by him. I am fearful they settle down in a state of blind self-security, trusting their eternal destiny in the hands of their leaders with a reckless confidence that in itself would thwart the purposes of God in their salvation, and weaken that influence they could give to their leaders, did they know for themselves, by the revelations of Jesus, that they are led in the right way. Let every man and woman know, by the whispering of the Spirit of God to themselves, whether their leaders are walking in the path the Lord dictates, or not. This has been my exhortation continually

Brigham Young, Journal of Discourses, Vol. 9, p. 150

-----

Latter-day Saints are not obedient because they are compelled to be obedient. They are obedient because they know certain spiritual truths and have decided, as an expression of their own individual agency, to obey the commandments of God. We are the sons and daughters of God, willing followers, disciples of the Lord Jesus Christ, and "under this head are [we] made free." (Mosiah 5: 8 )

Those who talk of blind obedience may appear to know many things, but they do not understand the doctrines of the gospel. There is an obedience that comes from a knowledge of the truth that transcends any external form of control. We are not obedient because we are blind, we are obedient because we can see.

Boyd K. Packer, "Agency and Control," Ensign, May 1983, 66

-----

Concerning the question of blind obedience. Not a man in this Church, since the Prophet Joseph Smith down to the present day, has ever asked any man to do as he was told blindly. No Prophet of God, no Apostle, no President of a Stake, no Bishop, who has had the spirit of his office and calling resting upon him, has ever asked a soul to do anything that they might not know was right and the proper thing to do. We do not ask you to do anything that you may not know it is your duty to do, or that you may not know will be a blessing for you to do.

If we give you counsel, we do not ask you to obey that counsel without you know[ing] that it is right to do so. But how shall we know that it is right? By getting the Spirit of God in our hearts, by which our minds may be opened and enlightened, that we may know the doctrine for ourselves, and be able to divide truth from error, light from darkness and good from evil

Josehp F. Smith, Collected Discourses, ed. Brian H. Stuy, Vol. 3 (Burbank, B.H.S. Publishing, 1987-1992)

-----

It is a mistaken idea, prevalent in the world, that the perpetuity of this work depends upon the authorities keeping the masses of the people in ignorance. The truth is the direct reverse, else why have we all these auxiliary organizations and quorums of priesthood in the church, for the education of the rising generation. Their being established in the faith depends upon their knowledge of the Gospel. Our greatest fear concerning our children in Zion is the possibility of their growing up in ignorance of the everlasting Gospel...As a matter of intelligent obedience--not blind obedience--we should observe to keep the word of wisdom. For the same reason we should observe to keep holy the Sabbath day, and the name of our Father in Heaven, and His Son Jesus Christ, and intelligently yield obedience to every requirement that is made at our hands

George F. Richards, Conference Report, April 1907, Afternoon Session, 15-17

LM

[NeuroTypical]

I would also challenge either of you on one point: did Jesus really overrule Moses or any prophet, if so on what point? Yes, He certainly ushered in a new covenant making the old obsolete (as prophesied in Jeremiah 31) but did he ever say anything to the effect: "Moses said this but now I tell you..." ?

I don't think anyone can come up with anything there. I would go the next step and challenge anyone to come up with an instance of one prophet overruling another prophet. I'm not talking the realm of opinion here, I'm talking about actual prophecies.

LM

[tubaloth]

So it is true then that new revelation can overrule the old in the LDS church. As an outsider looking in I would have to echo tree's sentiment that it sounds a bit "iffy."

How so? Just because a revelation was given at one point in time, we can not assume that is always going to be the case. For the most part, the doctrines that are taught are the same anyway (regardless of time and place) that’s what the gospel is all about. But we would have to realize that things would need “tweaking” over time as God kingdom grows. I don’t really see it as much as overriding old revelation, more just getting more current revelation to add to it.

Yes there was new Revelation on all male members holding the priesthood.

Yes there was new revelation on the stop of plural marriage.

But more I see its like building smaller temples, there probably never was a revelation on building temples to a certain size. It just what was happen at the time, that wasn’t going to work for how big the church was getting, so lets build them smaller. Is that over riding anything old?

This type of tweaks happen all the time in the church, its more of a policy change then it is really doctrine that changes.

[tree]

thank you tubaloth and loudmouth_mormon for that info. i am fairly new and have a lot to learn myself,, great insight!!!! tree

[NateHowe]

Thank-you for the link tubaloth, and thank you both for answering my question. So it is true then that new revelation can overrule the old in the LDS church. As an outsider looking in I would have to echo tree's sentiment that it sounds a bit "iffy."

I would also challenge either of you on one point: did Jesus really overrule Moses or any prophet, if so on what point? Yes, He certainly ushered in a new covenant making the old obsolete (as prophesied in Jeremiah 31) but did he ever say anything to the effect: "Moses said this but now I tell you..." ?

Have you read Matthew, Chapter 5? This is the crux of the chapter: Moses (and the other prophets of old) said one thing, but it's wrong, incomplete, or obsolete, so here's the truth. Take these excerpts for example:

Ye have heard that it was said by them of old time, Thou shalt not kill; and whosoever shall kill shall be in danger of the judgment:

But I say unto you, That whosoever is angry with his brother without a cause shall be in danger of the judgment: and whosoever shall say to his brother, Raca, shall be in danger of the council: but whosoever shall say, Thou fool, shall be in danger of hell fire.

Ye have heard that it was said by them of old time, Thou shalt not commit adultery:

But I say unto you, That whosoever looketh on a woman to lust after her hath committed adultery with her already in his heart.

Again, ye have heard that it hath been said by them of old time, Thou shalt not forswear thyself, but shalt perform unto the Lord thine oaths:

But I say unto you, Swear not at all. . .

[NeuroTypical]

Have you read Matthew, Chapter 5? This is the crux of the chapter: Moses (and the other prophets of old) said one thing, but it's wrong, incomplete, or obsolete, so here's the truth. Take these excerpts for example:

Now, I see in your examples, evidence of incomplete or obsolete, but not wrong.

LM

[NateHowe]

In speaking of oaths, for example, he says that the prophets of old encouraged swearing in a certain way. Christ plainly goes on to say that swearing is wrong.