Where the hell are the prophets!!!???

[Hallelujah]

President Hinckley gave his '7 years of plenty, 7 years of famine' talk in General Conference about 7 years ago.

1999

[Hallelujah]

At times like this any self-prolcaimed prophet who isn't out there announcing our fates and telling us what we an do about it isn't worth a tinker's damn. Is a charlatan.

YOu wouldn't know a prophet if he bit you on the arsh. so why does it matter to you?

The so-called prophets these days are just old men who don't know anything about the world we live in or the challenges people are facing.

[Hallelujah]

I'm 75% certain that GB Hinckley said something about America's leaders being inspired as we were moving into Iraq. I shall find it.

Stopping the slaughter of hundreds of thousands isn't worth action? It was in Bosnia. Not ok today?

[Hallelujah]

Here you go:

http://lds.org/conference/talk/display/0,5232,49-1-353-27,00.html

And a warning to dissenters:

So let the slaughter in Dafur continue?

[Hallelujah]

I disagree. I remember that talk and my impression at the time was that while GBH opposed war, generally speaking, he felt the Iraq war was necessary.

Given ALL the intelligence from ALL the intelligence agencies, including the UN, the real-time data indicated he still had WMD's. This monday morning quarterbacking is breathtaking.

Plus, Hussein could have shown the world what he did with the WMD's as required under the surrender outline in 1991. He chose not to. If he really had destroyed them, 'show us the money'. No war.

[SteelBlue]

So let the slaughter in Dafur continue?

I'm sure Darfur is a huge concern for you.

[wuapinmon]

So let the slaughter in Dafur continue?

Right....like you care about Darfur.

[All-American]

By the "preaching avoidance of unnecessary debt" definition, Clark Howard and Ted Haggard are also prophets.

That is a logical fallacy of the first class. If a, then b doesn't guarentee that b means a. I might just as appropriately walk up to an African-American, knowing the President is black, and start singing "Hail to the Chief".

[RobinFinderson]

If we experience massive inflation which wipes out all of our debts, thus proving that it didn't matter if we got into debt or not, does that prove the church isn't true?

[All-American]

If we experience massive inflation which wipes out all of our debts, thus proving that it didn't matter if we got into debt or not, does that prove the church isn't true?

Oh, absolutely- but only if carbonized tree stumps in the great plains proves the book of Mormon is true.

[Jeff Lebowski]

I agree...and I didn't have the exact quote on file. At a minimum it was a strong implication in the middle of general conference that Bush was doing the right thing. You should be thanking me for bringing up an interesting piece of recent Mormon history.

Yes, it is interesting. I have a friend who was really upset when he gave that talk. Didn't bother me too much at the time given that support for the invasion was fairly common and I didn't find his position too surprising. But the bit about dissenters bothered me.

The "Bush is inspired" concept is what I had been hearing from the local Mormon folks (who were using the GB Hinckley statements in defense of the war). You know darn well that plenty of Mormon folks think that politicians can be inspired by God (e.g. the founding fathers, Gayle Ruzicka, Orrin Hatch, and Bo Gritz).

Oddly enough, I am surprised how little you hear about this talk given how the war has turned out.

[All-American]

I was on my mission when he gave that talk, and had the talks from that general conference on tape. Consequentially, I listened to that talk more than probably any other talk given by a church president. I always have understood him to mean that he personally was supporting the war but in no way spoke on behalf of the church in that regard. I just don't see what you guys claim to see.

[TripletDaddy]

I was on my mission when he gave that talk, and had the talks from that general conference on tape. Consequentially, I listened to that talk more than probably any other talk given by a church president. I always have understood him to mean that he personally was supporting the war but in no way spoke on behalf of the church in that regard. I just don't see what you guys claim to see.

If true, this is interesting because what you are saying is that a Prophet speaking from the pulpit at GC is simply sharing his own personal thoughts and is in "no way" speaking for the Church. When you say "in no way," you are drawing a really bright line.

How are you determining when he speaks solo or when he speaks for the group? I am asking an honest question, btw, and am not necessarily disagreeing with you here.

[Solon]

By the "preaching avoidance of unnecessary debt" definition, Clark Howard and Ted Haggard are also prophets,"

I don't really want to insert myself into a discussion on modern revelation, so take this as a passing observation:

LDS often blur or redefine "prophecy" to mean "good advice." I see nothing wrong with separating "divinely inspired advice" and "pronouncements of future events", but in LDS usage the "prophet" seems to do more advising than foretelling.

(I don't see any inherent problems with this. Good advice is good advice.)

[UtahDan]

How are you determining when he speaks solo or when he speaks for the group? I am asking an honest question, btw, and am not necessarily disagreeing with you here.

This is one of the paradoxes of our faith. We believe that is it crucial to follow the prophet, but we also include an exception which nearly swallows the rule: that the prophet doesn't always speak as a prophet. And how do we tell what is what? The answer to me is that it is difficult to tell and that folks will say he is or is not depending on the position they want to support.

The most Orthodox view is that you are safer to assume that he is speaking as a prophet and listen (see the Hauns Mill story that is frequently cited for that proposition) and that is probably right, but when, as here, the prophet says something that people are uncomfortable with having as an official position they will say "well obviously he is expressing his own opinion." Its not obvious.

The same tactic can be, and is, employed by the liberal/unorthodox in exactly the reverse fashion.

What I think this actually highlights is how rarely the prophet says anything that is even remotely outside the mainstream of what is already accepted by the membership. And actually, I don't think the comments were are talking about are outside the mainstream of the church, I think they reflect it perfectly. I don't mean that as a critique, BTW.