Is New Revelation Necessary/Scriptural

[masterlee]

My opinion is yes, they are both necessary and scriptrural. This, to me, is at the heart of the LDS question; that being, who of all the churches have authority to teach. Wherever the vestitures of priesthood are, this principle governs: God speaks in these latter Days, he has not forsaken his people. Our God is in our midst, and reveals himself to his faithful. Every occasion we speak, it is to be with His words placed in our mouths, or else we are without the Power of God behind our words. Scripture has never indicated otherwise, though some have decieved themselves otherwise. If any has any doubt, look at these fools first line of defense--they quote the Book of Revelations, as written by John on the Isle of Patmos: "For I testify unto every man that heareth the words of the prophesy of this book, If any man shall add unto these things, God shall add unto him the plagues that are written in this book: And if any man shall take away from the words of this prophecy, God shall take away his part out of the book of life, and out of the holy city, and from the things which are written in this book." {Revelation 22:18-19.} Now, I ask, which book is John referring to? It couldn't mean the Bible, since the book we all now acknowledge as the Bible did not then exist at the time of it was written. If we are to acknowledge the book written of in this passage, then how did our ancestors determine which, of all the thousands of manuscripts, were of God and which ones were not? How did the compilers of the Bible know they even found every book of inspired origin in their search? What about the several books mentioned by name in the scriptures that were considered sacred by the apostles but are lost to us. What of the Books of Enoch, the Book of Iddo the Seer, the book of Nathan the prophet, Epistles written by the hand of Paul, and dozens of other books we do not have in our collection? Wouldn't these be just as sacred? So what, I ask, is the book we should neither add nor diminish? It is "The Revelation of Jesus Christ, which God gave unto...his servant John." {Rev. 1:1.}
The fact that our decietful friends include such a flimsy argument as their sole reasoning, shows that they have no better argument to substantiate their claims.

[Islander]

Masterlee - I like how you articulated that point.

Even more simple, when we pray for answers, guidance, instruction and insight we are asking God for revelation about our lives. We are imploring to our father to Reveal His hidden purposes and meaning for action in our everyday lives.

I am expecting Him to point me in the right direction in my business, with my family, my calling in the priesthood and just about every aspect of my existence. In fact, I totally depend on him for insight in how to conduct myself according to His will.

So yes, those in authority ask for revelation in order to do and act in His stead, according to and in sync with His will as to the affairs of His church and kingdom.

[Yekcidmij]

Originally Posted by masterlee

If any has any doubt, look at these fools first line of defense--they quote the Book of Revelations, as written by John on the Isle of Patmos: "For I testify unto every man that heareth the words of the prophesy of this book, If any man shall add unto these things, God shall add unto him the plagues that are written in this book: And if any man shall take away from the words of this prophecy, God shall take away his part out of the book of life, and out of the holy city, and from the things which are written in this book." {Revelation 22:18-19.} Now, I ask, which book is John referring to? It couldn't mean the Bible, since the book we all now acknowledge as the Bible did not then exist at the time of it was written.

Deut 4:2 and 12:32 say the same thing about Torah and Prov 30:5-6 reflects the same (among other places).

What about the several books mentioned by name in the scriptures that were considered sacred by the apostles but are lost to us.

What about them? How do you know they were considered sacred? Simply quoting another source doesn't mean you think it's sacred.

What of the Books of Enoch,

What about it? I have a copy.

the Book of Iddo the Seer, the book of Nathan the prophet, Epistles written by the hand of Paul, and dozens of other books we do not have in our collection?

What about them?

Wouldn't these be just as sacred?

Why? Just because they are mentioned?

So what, I ask, is the book we should neither add nor diminish? It is "The Revelation of Jesus Christ, which God gave unto...his servant John." {Rev. 1:1.}
The fact that our decietful friends include such a flimsy argument as their sole reasoning, shows that they have no better argument to substantiate their claims.

Oh, whew. I'm not a deceitful "friend". I never use that verse from Rev. as an argument outside of the Book of Revelation itself.

If you want to discuss specific passages that you think have problems, I'm up for it or if you have a good reason for me to good look for the book of Gad the Seer (1 Chr 29:29) I'll go start digging. Simply pointing out that Gad the Seer wrote a book and it was mentioned in 1 Chr 29 doesn't give me good reason to go look for it or worry about it.

[Traveler]

It does little to have G-d in our midst and then to act like the rest of the world. It matters little to have revelation if our marriages continue to fail and our children are not taught to live the gospel of Christ. 1Cor 13 would indicate that having many spiritual gifts are of little benefit if one lacks charity or the love of others as demonstrated by Christ.

I have always been put off by those that claim to have spiritual gifts but fail to take the responsibility that comes with such things. If the world has nothing but our claim to go by then our claim is empty – just like those that have to say they have a personal relationship with Christ before anyone could otherwise come to that conclusion.

It is better that others wonder why we are so kind and loving towards them than it is to claim that we spiritually superior and others not believe it or understand it.

The Traveler

[utcowboy]

I am probably misunderstanding your statement Traveler, I do that quite often!

But are you saying that we shouldn't try to clear up misunderstandings in the scriptures or to call people to repentance? Are we just to preach the gospel of Christ through our actions?? I'm not trying to start a fight or get off topic, just trying to understand which direction you are coming from and going to. Thanks

[masterlee]

yekcidmij--The whole point in my argument is to show that the Bible cannot be the source of all human knowledge, by acknowledging this you are to realise that ANY book that was written by the servants of God, including Gad and Enoch, must be just as sacred as anything that is included in the Bible, and neither can the man of God rely solely upon it's merits to guide them in their duties today. There is a impending need for God to direct us in these times, for the scriptures cannot save our souls today. I admit that the revelations that Moses had were sufficient to save the people of Isreal, and the revelation Timothy had familiar were sufficient to redeem him, but to say that their words would be sufficient to redeem us is to say that we can alienate ourself to God and live on the works and words of others. No, I testify unto you that the word of God is necessary to our salvation today, and there is no other source to go to than God himself and to his servants that know him.

[Islander]

Historical hindsight is always 20-20. But it does very little in terms of shedding light into the debate about whether revelation continues or not. I propose an experiment for the skeptics. The Trekies of the forum will know exactly what I am talking about. So the rest of you would have to go to the nearest video store and rent the whole Star Trek: The Next Generation series.

Imagine you are a member of "The Q". A race of almost omniscient, extremely powerful and mischievous beings that move across time and space freely, moving planets and acting god-like to "inferior species". Visualize the time line between The Creation and Malachi. Insert yourself anywhere there and we will erase your mental tape of any and all memory of future events. If you were to read the known scriptures up to that point, I would seriously doubt you would believe there was a need for any more scriptures. You would, most likely, state that you had enough knowledge and holy writ necessary for your salvation. You would have argued that you knew God's will and that you were living according to what has been revealed (up to that point in history) and that nothing else was going to be revealed in regards to how to approach God and obtain your salvation. Just as some do today.

That has been the claim of EVERY generation!!!! They went to the earth being VERY wrong. The Lord in His infinite wisdom kept raising prophets that spoke and declared to the people the way of salvation. He continued to reveal His will and mysteries and performing miracle to succor His children. But it was not seen that way as it happened. The words of the prophets became scripture and revelation, and truth and understanding to the FUTURE generations. But they (the prophets) ALL died stoned and imprisoned by their own people and their rulers. Prophets are never believed in their own time.

At last, God Himself, the Law Giver, the Creator and the Savior of mankind descended among the children of men and they said of Him: "... He casteth out devils through Beelzebub the chief of the devils." "...then answered the Jews, and said unto him [Jesus], Say we not well that thou art a Samaritan, and hast a devil?" "...And many of them said, He hath a devil, and is mad; why hear ye him?" "...the Pharisees and scribes murmured, saying, This man [Jesus] receiveth sinners, and eateth with them." "...Therefore said some of the Pharisees, This man [Jesus] is not of God, because he keepeth not the sabbath day." ...This man [Jesus], if he were a prophet, would have known who and what manner of woman this is that toucheth him: for she is a sinner." (brackets added)

So, my friends, I suggest to those that rely on borrowed, old and faded arguments to contest what is plain and discernible truth thru the Holy Ghost, that they should ponder in their minds the true intent of their hearts. Is it to seek after the things of that God that has made His name known among all nations because of His wonders and miracles and the power given to His servants? Or is it that their desire to contend, their quest to hoard and claim knowledge above the sovereignty of God the fuels their passion and argument to the point of blinding their eyes and minds?

I am no theologian, not do I claim any special or secret knowledge but what is available to all humble enough to seek Him with a broken heart. But, I have found of my own, without help or instruction and before I knew of the Restoration; that God speaks to his children, that there were and are men on the earth that speak and prophesy in His name and with His authority, and they walk with Him and they plead with Him and He hears and grants them their petition. And that will never end until the Savior comes and declares that the work is done.

[masterlee]

Islander, this is the second post you have written on this subject. I am thankful for your opinion. Don't hesitate to post anything you think important. You have an interesting point of view and I am pleased to hear it.

[Traveler]

Originally Posted by utcowboy

I am probably misunderstanding your statement Traveler, I do that quite often!

But are you saying that we shouldn't try to clear up misunderstandings in the scriptures or to call people to repentance? Are we just to preach the gospel of Christ through our actions?? I'm not trying to start a fight or get off topic, just trying to understand which direction you are coming from and going to. Thanks

Some so enjoy misunderstanding that what we say has no meaning to them regardless. We are a light to the world but only if we, ourselves live by light.

Sometimes I think it is better we just say. I am LDS and I do not believe what is said about us by some of our critics. Rather that cram our beliefs down everybody else use opportunities to convers and become friends with those that have interest.

If someone is not willing to be a friend it does not matter to them what you think. And few want to be someone's friend that is not honest in defineing what they believe by how they live. We need to cowboy up to what we say we believe.

The Traveler

[Yekcidmij]

Originally Posted by masterlee

yekcidmij--The whole point in my argument is to show that the Bible cannot be the source of all human knowledge,

Oh, I agree. I don't know why anyone would think that anyway.

by acknowledging this you are to realise that ANY book that was written by the servants of God, including Gad and Enoch, must be just as sacred as anything that is included in the Bible,

Why? Why must that be the case? To say that Gad the Seer wrote sacred scripture is a pure form of argument from silence. How can you consider something to be sacred when you don't have a clue what it says? That seems irresponsible.

Fortunately, I have a copy of Enoch; why must I consider it part of the canon, and do you use Enoch as part of the canon? What about the deuterocanon; do you consider those canon as well? They were written by servants of God and are considered sacred by some.

There is a impending need for God to direct us in these times, for the scriptures cannot save our souls today.

The Messiah saves souls. That much is clear from scripture. And when has God not been directing His people? Has there been a time in our history when God stopped being Sovreign?

I admit that the revelations that Moses had were sufficient to save the people of Isreal, and the revelation Timothy had familiar were sufficient to redeem him,

Revelations don't redeem. God redeems. That much is clear throughout scripture too.

No, I testify unto you that the word of God is necessary to our salvation today, and there is no other source to go to than God himself and to his servants that know him.

So long as the words I'm hearing don't have God contradicting Himself. Example: If I read something where God reveals that we are to not worship idols and someone comes along later and says "let's go worship that idol", that doesn't conform to what God has already revealed about Himself.

And when has God's Word not been necessary for salvation? John 1 indicates that it's always been necessary.