What were the prophesies of GBH?

[creekster]

Originally Posted by Adam

Charity never faileth indeed.

You are a fitting representative of your faction.

I thought INdy's response was far too strong. Yet despite your self-announced feast at the table of righteousness, you respond by ridiculing him for being without charity (which I guess puts you in a similar place, eh?) and then accuse him of being ins some sort of faction. Not your faction, obviously, but the one you think is extreme or dumb, I guess. Gee, that really sound charitable and loving, doesn't it.

You are trying too hard. It's clear you think you have a better idea. Many of us think you are interesting, but probably wrong about a lot of what you are saying. Why you feel the need to ridicule those who are trying to be faithful (and are doing so in a manner consistent with what they are taught in church by priesthood leaders) while claiming all the while to be more enlightened and to really know the correct way is beyond me. Practice the principles that you claim to follow and I suspect you might be a little less abrasive, a lot less arrogant and more accepting. Honestly, I find your approach more insidious than SU's, who at least is honest in what he wants. What do you want here? Really what are you trying to achieve? Self-satisfaction? Criticism of those faithful you see as fools? Are these the worthy goals your feasting leads you to?

Lighten up, Francis.

[creekster]

Originally Posted by Adam

You are in serious denial dude.

Mosiah 8 says someone who looks through the U&T is called a seer. Then the last verse I quoted says a seer can also prophesy. You try to turn that around to fit the modern usage. This is dishonest. I have no problem with a modern usage, but lets admit it is different then the scriptural one.

Is it your position that one cannot, under any circumstanace, be a seer unless he is using a U&T, or stone, to translate ancient records? This is an honest question. To me, I don't see how you get that from the verses in Mosiah. A seer sees. This is, I think, an interesting insight into how translation under these circumstances might work, but I do nto see the Mosiah passage as suggesting the ONLY way to qualify as a seer is to translate ancient records. WHat happens when they are all translated? No more seers, I guess.

[All-American]

Originally Posted by creekster

Is it your position that one cannot, under any circumstanace, be a seer unless he is using a U&T, or stone, to translate ancient records? This is an honest question. To me, I don't see how you get that from the verses in Mosiah. A seer sees. This is, I think, an interesting insight into how translation under these circumstances might work, but I do nto see the Mosiah passage as suggesting the ONLY way to qualify as a seer is to translate ancient records. WHat happens when they are all translated? No more seers, I guess.

What the Mosiah passage DOES say is that if a man uses the U&T to translate, he is called a seer. It also says that a seer can know of things which are past, and also of things which are to come. Is ALL of that to be done solely and exclusively through the U&T and translation of ancient documents?

The Mosiah passage says that the use of the U&T to translate is a right that belongs solely to a seer. If a man is commanded to use them to translate, he is a seer. Now you, Adam, are saying that this is the ONLY function of a seer according to scripture. Upon reading verse 17, I find it quite clear that it is but one of several functions he may perform, and the U&T but one of the tools he may use.

And furthermore, I have not accused you of dishonesty on the grounds of our disagreement, and I'll thank you to extend the same courtesy to me.

[All-American]

Originally Posted by Adam

Point well taken. I come across as an ass all to often here. I'm sorry.

What do I want? I want truth and honesty and integrity at all times in all things whatever the consequences might be. Mainly.

If the man sees via interpreters, he is a seer. Very well. I don't see any reason why he can only see via interpreters.

My personal opinion is that a prophet is not necessarily one who has seen a vision. As I noted before, the main duty of a prophet is not to see, but to speak.

In all likelihood, the significance of the fact that we sustain them as "prophets, seers, and revelators" is that we sustain them as OUR prophets, seers, and revelators; id est, they who are authorized to speak out, see visions, and reveal the will of God to us on God's behalf.

[All-American]

Originally Posted by Adam

Hugh Nibley said that 1 Ne 1:19 set forth the two role of any prophet -- to call the people to repentance and testify of the Messiah. So I agree with you that the primary role of a prophet is to speak, not see.

I agree that prophets can see marvelous things many ways. But translation seems to require interperters--hence the difference in being a seer. Is there an instance of sacred miraculous translation that occurred without interpreter stones?

I agree with your last paragraph, except seeing alone doesn't constitute a seer according to Mosiah 8. I like Swarthout's commentary in the other thread on this point.

I don't have any problem with the idea that LDS leaders still have, and are still authorized to use, interpreters.

Here's the question that seem to touch upon our main point of disagreement: Can a seer do anything, besides translate with interpreters, that a prophet and/or revelator cannot (that is, a function exclusively attributed to a seer)? If so, what? and does the performance of that function require the use of translators?

I am of the understanding that there's more to being a seer, as opposed to merely a prophet or revelator, than translating. We may have to agree to disagree on that point.

[tooblue]

Originally Posted by Adam

You are in serious denial dude.

Mosiah 8 says someone who looks through the U&T is called a seer. Then the last verse I quoted says a seer can also prophesy. You try to turn that around to fit the modern usage. This is dishonest. I have no problem with a modern usage, but lets admit it is different then the scriptural one.

Your narrow reading of Mosiah has been soundly dismantled and you have the gaul to suggest American is in denial?

[tooblue]

Originally Posted by Adam

Point well taken. I come across as an ass all to often here. I'm sorry.

What do I want? I want truth and honesty and integrity at all times in all things whatever the consequences might be. Mainly.

Then act with integrity and offer the WHOLE truth.

[All-American]

Originally Posted by tooblue

Your narrow reading of Mosiah has been soundly dismantled and you have the gaul to suggest American is in denial?

I think his Gaul can be divided into three parts . . . but he's apologized; I'd just as soon leave it be.

[tooblue]

Originally Posted by All-American

I think his Gaul can be divided into three parts . . . but he's apologized; I'd just as soon leave it be.

Understood.

[Mormon Red Death]

Did I not provide two instances where he "saw"?