Fourteen Fundaments in Following the Prophet

[Mullenite]

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.”

[JohnBirchSociety]

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...)

[prisonchaplain]

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.

[JohnBirchSociety]

Originally Posted by prisonchaplain

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...

[Hemidakota]

Not to forget, we have the lost tribes who still have John the Beloved. He is the Lord's anointed and is called to lead them as a prophet.

[skalenfehl]

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.

[Hemidakota]

I concur. No matter if it was prophet of former times or today, if one believes they are called of GOD, they will only be allowed to teach those pertinent topics for that time.

[WillowTheWhisp]

Originally Posted by JohnBirchSociety

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.

[JohnBirchSociety]

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...

[Hemidakota]

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