Fourteen Fundaments in Following the Prophet


Recommended Posts

Home Click the website for the rest

Fourteen Fundamentals in Following the Prophet

President Ezra Taft Benson,

Of the Quorum of the Twelve

(Address given Tuesday, February 26, 1980 at Brigham Young University)

My beloved brothers and sisters. I am honored to be in your presence today. You students are a part of a choice young generation—a generation which might well witness the return of the Lord.

Not only is the Church growing in number today, it is growing in faithfulness and, even more important, our young generation, as a group, is even more faithful than the older generation. God has reserved you for the eleventh hour—the great and dreadful day of the Lord (D&C 110:16). It will be your responsibility not only to help to carry the kingdom to a triumph but to save your own soul and strive to save those of your family and to honor the principles of the inspired constitution of the United States.

To help you pass the crucial tests which lie ahead, I am going to give you today several aspects of a grand key which, if you will honor, will crown you with God’s glory and bring you out victorious in spite of Satan’s fury.

Soon we will be honoring our prophet on his 85th birthday. As a Church we sing the hymn, “We Thank Thee, O God, for a Prophet.” (Hymn no. 196). Here then is the grand key—Follow the prophet—and here are fourteen fundamentals in following the prophet, the President of The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints.

First: The prophet is the only man who speaks for the Lord in everything.

In section 132 verse 7 of the Doctrine and Covenants [D&C 132:7] the Lord speaks of the prophet—the president—and says:

“There is never but one on the earth at a time on whom this power and the keys of this priesthood are conferred.”

Then in section 21 verses 4–6 [D&C 21:4–6], the Lord states:

“Wherefore, meaning the church, thou shalt give heed unto all his words and commandments which he shall give unto you as he receiveth them, walking in all holiness before me;

“For his word ye shall receive, as if from mine own mouth, in all patience and faith.

“For by doing these things the gates of hell shall not prevail against you.”

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I've always had a problem with this address.

Mainly, it is with item #2...

I believe it illogical to the extreme to say the Prophet is more valuable than the Standard Works, or visa-versa. They are both equally essential to our salvation.

It is almost as if Pres. Benson is opening to door to the Prophet being able to go against clear scriptural teaching...(ironically, I personally think Pres. Benson was the most "prophetic" of the prophets of my lifetime...)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

JBS, is not the teaching of the Church that the Prophet's words are God's words, and therefore, the preceding revelations--including those written--should be judged through the prism of the latest word from the Lord? In other words, are not Prophet's words primary, because they are assumed to be God's latest words to us?

It is this factor that distinguishes your church from those traditional churches that embrace modern prophetic revelations--through words of prophecy, or tongues and interpretations. This latter group insists that the revelations be tested through the rubric of already established Scripture.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

JBS, is not the teaching of the Church that the Prophet's words are God's words, and therefore, the preceding revelations--including those written--should be judged through the prism of the latest word from the Lord? In other words, are not Prophet's words primary, because they are assumed to be God's latest words to us?

It is this factor that distinguishes your church from those traditional churches that embrace modern prophetic revelations--through words of prophecy, or tongues and interpretations. This latter group insists that the revelations be tested through the rubric of already established Scripture.

I think "primary" but not "superior" would be correct.

For example (hypothetical):

Tithing is clearly, no room for wiggle, 10% of income. If President Monson said it was 15%, he would be wrong. However, he's free to define "income" and the method of payment / collection / use of tithing...

Where the Scriptures have clearly spoken, the living prophet may only reaffirm those statements, he cannot change them. Of course, I'm talking about absolute statements of Scripture, not about things where there is ambiguity...

As a matter of personal opinion, this is why I do not accept the later teaching of Joseph Smith on the nature of GOD as an being who became GOD. Scripture is so clear that GOD was always, in all respects, GOD, and that he alone created all things, that there is no room for an anthropomorphic deity...I also believe the same about the practice of polygamy and denial of priesthood to people of color...

It is a dangerous, slippery slope, when we place the voice of one man (whatever the office) above that of concrete, unchanging scriptural foundations...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

JBS, perhaps you make the assumption that a prophet would speak anything contrary to the scriptures. In essence, if the scriptures are God's word, and the prophet is God's voice and they are the same, then they would never contradict. Only God would decide if He gives something or takes something away and that is why, in my opinion, that a prophet could be considered more important because a prophet would only convey to us whatever God Himself would have us know or do and we usually have received things line upon line and precept upon precept.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

As a matter of personal opinion, this is why I do not accept the later teaching of Joseph Smith on the nature of GOD as an being who became GOD. Scripture is so clear that GOD was always, in all respects, GOD, and that he alone created all things, that there is no room for an anthropomorphic deity....

He didn't change from one type of being to another. He just matured to his full potential, just as we can. A caterpillar becomes a butterfly but it doesn't change species. It's perfectly natural.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The Scriptures completely refute the concept of GOD becoming GOD. In fact, I cannot come up with another principle that is more clearly, with no ambiguity whatsoever, taught in scripture.

GOD, the supreme being / creator, has always been as he now is. He is unchanging. He is the source of all that exists. Scripture leaves no wiggle room on this.

This is why I reject the proposition that the living prophet is more valuable than the written scripture.

Example:

GOD had a prophet Noah, to declare the coming flood. However, if previous scripture stated that there would never be a flood from GOD, then Noah saying there would be would be incompatible with scripture.

I believe what Joseph Smith taught was like that. Scripture already clearly, unquestionably taught that GOD has always been as he now is, unchanging, omniscient, omnipotent, etc... Therefore, the Prophet Joseph saying otherwise is a complete contradiction of a foundational, absolute declaration of scripture.

GOD is GOD. Always has been, always will be. He didn't become GOD. He is the creator, not a creation...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

John, it nows come down to prayer whether or not this is important to you to know or not.

I want to be very clear, Joseph Smith was / is the founding Prophet of this dispensation.

He really did have the first vision / receive the priesthood / translate the Book of Mormon, etc...

It's just that some foundational matters were settle long before his birth. One is that GOD has always been GOD. Another is that Christ is the Savior, the only begotten of GOD...etc...We are asking for big trouble when tamper with this scriptural facts...

Pres. Monson is the Prophet, and his word is gold to me, as long as it doesn't violate already established foundational premises...(and fortunately, nobody in my lifetime, or even going back a hundred years before I was born, has...)

If those foundational elements of scripture can be modified by prophetic decree, then they aren't foundational at all, and I can place no real faith in what they say...

It's ironic that many say that the change allowing priesthood for people of color changed a fundamental tenet of the Church, when actually, scripturally, it corrected a very large wrong in Church teaching...The scriptures (New Testament in particular) are very clear that the gospel is for all people, without restrictions...

Anyways, I love the prophets and what the do for us...in them we have safety from the world's storms....

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 5 months later...

JBS, perhaps you make the assumption that a prophet would speak anything contrary to the scriptures. In essence, if the scriptures are God's word, and the prophet is God's voice and they are the same, then they would never contradict. Only God would decide if He gives something or takes something away and that is why, in my opinion, that a prophet could be considered more important because a prophet would only convey to us whatever God Himself would have us know or do and we usually have received things line upon line and precept upon precept.

At the risk of being cast to outer-darkness on this forum, I believe I've pretty bluntly stated that Joseph Smith, at the end of his life, did actually teach things that are contrary to foundational, unequivicable statements of the scriptures.

The primary example would be that GOD has always been GOD, is not 'a' GOD, but rather is the only GOD. He is not anthropomorphic, he did not become GOD, he is GOD.

To lds.net outer-darkness I go.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

He didn't change from one type of being to another. He just matured to his full potential, just as we can. A caterpillar becomes a butterfly but it doesn't change species. It's perfectly natural.

It is so unscriptural that I can't even believe that people miss it.

This is a central tenet of all of scripture. GOD created all that exists. He did not become GOD or progress, nor does he progress. He has all attributes of righteousness in perfection, and always has. He created time, and is not beholden to it.

All that is, exist through his decree. He is subordinate to nothing.

This is the clear, no-wiggle-room, no-loopholes, no-nonsense, declaration of all of Scripture. It is so fundamental to Christianity as to be absurd, as offensive as that term is, that a person who claims to be Christian does not understand it.

GOD has always been at his "full potential"...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Home Click the website for the rest

Fourteen Fundamentals in Following the Prophet

President Ezra Taft Benson,

Of the Quorum of the Twelve

(Address given Tuesday, February 26, 1980 at Brigham Young University)

My beloved brothers and sisters. I am honored to be in your presence today. You students are a part of a choice young generation—a generation which might well witness the return of the Lord.

Not only is the Church growing in number today, it is growing in faithfulness and, even more important, our young generation, as a group, is even more faithful than the older generation. God has reserved you for the eleventh hour—the great and dreadful day of the Lord (D&C 110:16). It will be your responsibility not only to help to carry the kingdom to a triumph but to save your own soul and strive to save those of your family and to honor the principles of the inspired constitution of the United States.

To help you pass the crucial tests which lie ahead, I am going to give you today several aspects of a grand key which, if you will honor, will crown you with God’s glory and bring you out victorious in spite of Satan’s fury.

Soon we will be honoring our prophet on his 85th birthday. As a Church we sing the hymn, “We Thank Thee, O God, for a Prophet.” (Hymn no. 196). Here then is the grand key—Follow the prophet—and here are fourteen fundamentals in following the prophet, the President of The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints.

First: The prophet is the only man who speaks for the Lord in everything.

In section 132 verse 7 of the Doctrine and Covenants [D&C 132:7] the Lord speaks of the prophet—the president—and says:

“There is never but one on the earth at a time on whom this power and the keys of this priesthood are conferred.”

Then in section 21 verses 4–6 [D&C 21:4–6], the Lord states:

“Wherefore, meaning the church, thou shalt give heed unto all his words and commandments which he shall give unto you as he receiveth them, walking in all holiness before me;

“For his word ye shall receive, as if from mine own mouth, in all patience and faith.

“For by doing these things the gates of hell shall not prevail against you.”

Welcome back...haven't seen you in awhile.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

At the risk of being cast to outer-darkness on this forum, I believe I've pretty bluntly stated that Joseph Smith, at the end of his life, did actually teach things that are contrary to foundational, unequivicable statements of the scriptures.

The primary example would be that GOD has always been GOD, is not 'a' GOD, but rather is the only GOD. He is not anthropomorphic, he did not become GOD, he is GOD.

To lds.net outer-darkness I go.

If you are referring too that GOD has always been a GOD, that is not correct. Joseph was right and those who will inherit the Celestial state will understand it perfectly as Joseph witnessed it. There many things he witnessed that is not release in our days.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

If you are referring too that GOD has always been a GOD, that is not correct. Joseph was right and those who will inherit the Celestial state will understand it perfectly as Joseph witnessed it. There many things he witnessed that is not release in our days.

Well, we'll have to agree to disagree on this.

The Scriptures are so incredibly clear that it is sad to me that people cannot see that GOD has always been GOD.

Anyways...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 4 weeks later...

It is so unscriptural that I can't even believe that people miss it.

This is a central tenet of all of scripture. GOD created all that exists. He did not become GOD or progress, nor does he progress. He has all attributes of righteousness in perfection, and always has. He created time, and is not beholden to it.

All that is, exist through his decree. He is subordinate to nothing.

This is the clear, no-wiggle-room, no-loopholes, no-nonsense, declaration of all of Scripture. It is so fundamental to Christianity as to be absurd, as offensive as that term is, that a person who claims to be Christian does not understand it.

GOD has always been at his "full potential"...

Define God?

Because to me yes God may have always been at His full potential but Heavenly Father may not have been. Certainly the Saviour wasn't and the Holy Ghost has yet to be.

For me when I use the term God it has the potential to include many other gods of whom we have no knowledge of within it. Heavenly Father and the Godhead are our God but I do not close my mind to the idea they are all that makeup God

I suspect Joseph Smith was not speakinig unscripturally he just didn't understand what he had well enough at that time to describe it in such a manner,.,,, to assume you know scripture as well as Joseph Smith is a little presumptuous, like he said if we could stare into heaven for just 5 minutes we would understand more than from a lifetime spent studying the scriptures(not exact quote). He saw Heavenly Father and Jesus Christ from just that one meeting and subsequent ones with Mormon, Moses etc he will have known more than we can learn at this time unless of course one has had similar visions and for all I know you have.

The term Eternal implies something cyclical and I am not quite sure I know all my journies before this one, I do know I don't know fully what is to come

-Charley

Edited by Elgama
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think "primary" but not "superior" would be correct.

For example (hypothetical):

Tithing is clearly, no room for wiggle, 10% of income. If President Monson said it was 15%, he would be wrong. However, he's free to define "income" and the method of payment / collection / use of tithing...

Where the Scriptures have clearly spoken, the living prophet may only reaffirm those statements, he cannot change them. Of course, I'm talking about absolute statements of Scripture, not about things where there is ambiguity...

As a matter of personal opinion, this is why I do not accept the later teaching of Joseph Smith on the nature of GOD as an being who became GOD. Scripture is so clear that GOD was always, in all respects, GOD, and that he alone created all things, that there is no room for an anthropomorphic deity...I also believe the same about the practice of polygamy and denial of priesthood to people of color...

It is a dangerous, slippery slope, when we place the voice of one man (whatever the office) above that of concrete, unchanging scriptural foundations...

The Law of Consecration is a higher law than the law of tithing - and is certainly more than 15%.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I believe it illogical to the extreme to say the Prophet is more valuable than the Standard Works, or visa-versa. They are both equally essential to our salvation.

I disagree, because what was reveled in the past can and does change. The Lord does reveal new standers. The best example of this is when Christ came, he full filled the law of Moses and so more (completely new doctrine) was reveled (the higher law). The full idea was not taught before! Jesus was bringing new ideas to full extent.

I suggest for further reading on #2 see here

Teachings of Living Prophets

This is a central tenet of all of scripture. GOD created all that exists. He did not become GOD or progress, nor does he progress. He has all attributes of righteousness in perfection, and always has. He created time, and is not beholden to it.

I think we would have actually go to the scripture to support all of these ideas. Even with that in mind we have to keep this scripture in mind found in Moses 1:35

But only an account of this earth, and the inhabitants thereof, give I unto you. For behold, there are many worlds that have passed away by the word of my power. And there are many that now stand, and innumerable are they unto man; but all things are numbered unto me, for they are mine and I know them.

Meaning what God is teaching us in the scriptures is only account of our world. We aren’t going to learn about God’s childhood. We aren’t going to learn about what Laws God obeyed. The scriptural references we have are in relation to God (a supreme, perfect being). This is why what Joseph Smith taught is out side of the scriptures! Its new revelation!

GOD has always been at his "full potential"...

Based off of what? In relation to our world, our existence yes. Based off of God’s existence and His time, no.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
 Share