Comments on: Prophet, seer, and revelator

By: CRC

CRC — Sun, 02 Mar 2008 23:06:08 +0000

One interesting bit of church history trivia that is seldom talked about is that when Oliver Cowdery was called by revelation to help pick and ordain the 12 apostles, he told them that their calling as apostles would not be “complete” until the Savior appeared to them and personally ordains them.

I find that particularly interesting in light of the quote by BY saying that: he hadn’t seen the Savior and that he didn’t expect to until he died.

After studying virtually every known sermon that BY gave, I tend to think that quote from Brigham is authentic and accurate.

By: Clark

Clark — Sat, 19 Jan 2008 00:32:57 +0000

Ah. OK. I thought you were referring to something else.

Regarding Brigham’s process you’d have to be clearer. I think some elements folks would agree with and some disagree with. The role of becoming a Christ being the key issue.

Regarding individualism and the spirit birth I actually think things are a tad more complex. But certainly he didn’t accept an eternal Cartesian mind the way many do.

By: J. Stapley

J. Stapley — Fri, 18 Jan 2008 23:44:26 +0000

Clark, Brigham proposed that our mind was not eternal, and that our identities and existence as individuals began with spirit birth. I don’t know too many folks that believe that. As to exaltation, the details are esoteric, but generally, I believe most Mormon’s would disagree with Brigham’s process.

By: Clark Goble

Clark Goble — Fri, 18 Jan 2008 18:25:50 +0000

Most people think Brigham wrong on spirit birth? I think his view is still the majority view. Ditto with exaltation. It’s only the identity of the father of our spirits and the father of Jesus in the flesh that is considered an error.

By: Ray

Ray — Wed, 16 Jan 2008 18:44:06 +0000

#68 – Amen, J. We decry speculation from the past that led to doctrine that later was dropped – then we decry our current apostles’ lack of speculation. We can’t have it both ways, and I much prefer the current model.

By: J. Stapley

J. Stapley — Wed, 16 Jan 2008 18:28:27 +0000

I agree, Taysom, that is very important.

AHLDuke, I tend to think that modern equivocations on obscure doctrine are born of sound judgment. Brigham had no problem with doctrinal innovation. His perspectives on spirit birth, Adam-God, exaltation, etc. are well documented…it just so happens that most people think he was also quite wrong.

By: AHLDuke

AHLDuke — Wed, 16 Jan 2008 17:45:04 +0000

I wonder what light BY’s statements and experience might shed on our current Prophet’s inability or reticence to speak about certain topics that were apparently and formerly important doctrines, and in his opinion, no longer are? (I am thinking of the “becoming like God, and God once being like us”). Also, Pres. Hinckley’s narrative of the receipt of the 1978 revelation on priesthood is almost emphatic on the point that while it was a “Pentecostal spirit”, WE did not see anything. I think it is interesting that he does not restrict the lack of a visual revelation to himself, but states that none of those present (presumably the whole First Presidency and Q12) saw anything.

By: SC Taysom

SC Taysom — Wed, 16 Jan 2008 17:08:54 +0000

Josh’s point (via David G.) is an important one. Joseph’s presence as The Prophet extended even into the 20th century. As I recall, Quinn made the point that until David O. McKay’s presidency, any reference to “the prophet” had as its object Joseph Smith.

By: David Grua

David Grua — Wed, 16 Jan 2008 16:55:18 +0000

I haven’t had a chance to catch up on the comments, but I got an email back from Josh that may be helpful.

One thing you can add on your post, if it already hasn’t been said, is that to Brigham Young, Joseph Smith was never fully gone. Remember that Young is seeing him in dreams, talking to Joseph, receiving guidance, etc. Joseph still presides over the dispensation and is the great prophet, so Brigham is clearly reticent to assume such a mantle. Plus, in the minutes of the Nauvoo showdown with Rigdon, Young uses the term prophet to characterize Rigdon–a charismatic leader without priesthood authority. In contrast to this, Young forwards the Twelve collectively as having authority to lead the church, but he goes on to say that Joseph will never be replaced.

By: Mark D.

Mark D. — Wed, 16 Jan 2008 07:52:13 +0000

kevinf (#23), Woodruff's position was probably derived from 1 Cor 12:28:

And God hath set some in the church, first apostles, secondarily prophets, thirdly teachers,...