Mormons don't really believe in revelation by the Spirit.

[_Thama]

I recently read a blog by a Xed but believing member of the FLDS; a "best friend" of Warren Jeffs.

He sounded like your typical LDS apologist... if people would only pray and obey and soften their heart, etc. etc. etc., they would know by the power of the HG that their gospel was true and that they are led by Christ.

When someone can figure out how to tell the difference between the HG and personal intuition/ideas/desires/wants/needs, then maybe the HG would be the way to go.

Until then it seems to just add to the confusion and messiness of religious beliefs.

What is most interesting is that this issue (of a very unreliable HG), is pretty much ignored by apologists. They hold the HG as the ultimate source of testimony and truth but (as far as I know), do not address the issue at all.

Actually to be fair, I have heard some apologists claim that those with differing beliefs are able to get inspiration but it is not necessarily true, or that they are limited in understanding truth, etc. etc.

The problem is, everyone who claims they are receiving revelation and inspiration believe they are the special ones with the real truth.

~td~

At the same time, though, you can never really know what sort of revelation anyone else has received. Simply because they say they have or haven't doesn't mean that they aren't deluded, asking the wrong questions, or just trying to fit in and avoid criticism.

If someone really has received revelation from God that cannot possibly be explained through psychological or other non-divine means, then following that revelation is only logical -- you can't judge it based on contradictions with the internal worlds of others to which you have only superficial access.

Then again, after a lifetime in the Church, a faithful mission, many callings, seminary and institute, and temple attendance... when I was totally honest with myself there was nothing there that couldn't be chalked up to wanting to believe very, very badly.

[_dblagent007]

When I was at BYU, revelation was often claimed as the reason a dashing young maiden should marry some man. Funny, but the women didn't seem to believe in these revelations.

Then why did it work so well for Joseph Smith?

Some of the women he told this to rejected him. Others gained their own testimony and married him.

[_dblagent007]

The process of receiving revelation takes no small amount of effort. For this reason, I think most Mormons forego trying to determine whether some other member's claimed revelations are real. I think most Mormons simply apply the "does this smell funny" test, come to a conclusory conclusion, and move on.

Maybe my MIL's big bosoms were pure inspiration (I think my FIL thought so), but I'm skeptical. I have no intention of actually finding out since the answer doesn't matter to me (this assumes that God would even tell me, since it is really has nothing to do with me).

So LDS Mr A could determine whether LDS Mr B's claimed revelation was true or not, if:

(a) Mr A was willing to make the necessary effort
(b) Mr B's revelation concerned something that was something to do with Mr A.

Thus, for example, if dblagent007's MIL's revelation to the effect that she should have her breasts enlarged included the revelation that dblagent007 should pay for the procedure, then dblagent007 could reasonably expect to be able to use revelation to check the reliability of MIL's revelation. And if the breast enlargement was costly enough,dblagent007 probably would do so.

An interesting religion ...

I suppose your hypothetical is correct, but I think most Mormons, if asked to pay for someone's breast enlargement (other than the wife's), would probably say no and just move on. It's just too weird of a request to take seriously, revelation or not.

[_truth dancer]

Hi Thama...

At the same time, though, you can never really know what sort of revelation anyone else has received. Simply because they say they have or haven't doesn't mean that they aren't deluded, asking the wrong questions, or just trying to fit in and avoid criticism.

Exactly.

Even the recipient of the "revelation" seems completely unable to determine this. (Think of all the prophets and apostles who have gotten things seriously wrong).

If someone really has received revelation from God that cannot possibly be explained through psychological or other non-divine means, then following that revelation is only logical -- you can't judge it based on contradictions with the internal worlds of others to which you have only superficial access.

I have yet to hear of even one "revelation" that cannot be explained through other means... people have all sorts of other-wordly, unusual, mysterious experiences. The questions is... how does one determine which experiences/revelations are from God? (Assuming God is actually answering some people and not others).

However, I find it difficult to believe that if God exists God would tell people all sorts of varying "truths"; "truths" that completely contradict each other.

Or that God is somehow tricking the human population by giving all sorts of contradictory information. Ya know?

Then again, after a lifetime in the Church, a faithful mission, many callings, seminary and institute, and temple attendance... when I was totally honest with myself there was nothing there that couldn't be chalked up to wanting to believe very, very badly.

Or perhaps even needing to believe.

I think of Helen Mar and contemplate a fourteen year old girl put in the place of having to chose between being a wife of Joseph Smith and having the exaltation of her entire family guaranteed, or living a normal life of a girl and being considered disobedient and unworthy; putting her entire posterity at risk.

I don't think her brain and soul could make any other decision than the one she did.

Similarly, there are thousands of examples of children who allow themselves to be abused to save a parent.

Anyway, if someone could figure out how to tell if it is really God doing the inspiring, or the HG sharing truth, perhaps the world would be a lot better off.

As it is, seems the whole HG thing provides nothing but a false sense of truth, arrogance, and confusion.

~td~

[_Sister Mary Lisa]

So LDS Mr A could determine whether LDS Mr B's claimed revelation was true or not, if:

(a) Mr A was willing to make the necessary effort
(b) Mr B's revelation concerned something that was something to do with Mr A.

Thus, for example, if dblagent007's MIL's revelation to the effect that she should have her breasts enlarged included the revelation that dblagent007 should pay for the procedure, then dblagent007 could reasonably expect to be able to use revelation to check the reliability of MIL's revelation. And if the breast enlargement was costly enough,dblagent007 probably would do so.

An interesting religion ...

I suppose your hypothetical is correct, but I think most Mormons, if asked to pay for someone's breast enlargement (other than the wife's), would probably say no and just move on. It's just too weird of a request to take seriously, revelation or not.

Except the Mormons are taught to revere Joseph Smith, who was FULL OF weird requests he made while claiming them to be revelation. This example of being told to pay for your MIL's breasts isn't any more weird than Joseph's requests of his brethren to share their wives in plural marriage, or to give their teen daughters to him in plural marriage because God said to. Or to give their entire fortunes to the Kirtland Safety Society Bank that was supposedly of God, yet it failed miserably.

ETA: This is not to say that your MIL's breasts will fail eventually. LMAO.

[_dblagent007]

ETA: This is not to say that your MIL's breasts will fail eventually. LMAO.

You know, with an avatar like that, you really shouldn't be allowed to discuss this in any way, shape, or form.

[_Sister Mary Lisa]

ETA: This is not to say that your MIL's breasts will fail eventually. LMAO.

You know, with an avatar like that, you really shouldn't be allowed to discuss this in any way, shape, or form.

I'd think it'd make me MORE qualified to discuss this.

[_beastie]

I have long maintained that the foundation of "personal revelation" is the most serious evidence against the truthfulness of the LDS church. It is the grand flaw behind it all.

One of my favorite MAD threads discusses it at length:

http://www.mormonapologetics.org/index. ... opic=14774

In the end, no defender of the faith could offer a sound reason for why personal revelation tends to be so problematic, and yet we're supposed to trust personal revelation as the vehicle to pronounce authoritative truth claims. In fact, the reason they maintain it is right to do so is... you guessed it.... personal revelation. You can't make this stuff up.

[_asbestosman]

There is indeed a problem, but it's not that Mormons don't believe in revelation by the spirit. The problem is that many of them don't know how to discern the spirit. They think that knowing the handshake test is enough. Even stewardship isn't enough. What they fail to recognize is that scope is actually much broader. God isn't going to reveal secrets of the universe to them (such as details about Noah) that He hasn't already revealed to the prophets. What God reveals to people through personal revelation is deeply personal and rarely controversial (things like that the church is true, whether to take a job offer, where the car keys are, etc.).

[_beastie]

There is indeed a problem, but it's not that Mormons don't believe in revelation by the spirit. The problem is that many of them don't know how to discern the spirit. They think that knowing the handshake test is enough. Even stewardship isn't enough. What they fail to recognize is that scope is actually much broader. God isn't going to reveal secrets of the universe to them (such as details about Noah) that He hasn't already revealed to the prophets. What God reveals to people through personal revelation is deeply personal and rarely controversial (things like that the church is true, whether to take a job offer, where the car keys are, etc.).

These same people who don't know how to discern the spirit are using their discernment of the spirit to "know" the church is true.