Apologists vs. Apostles, Round Three: Is the Prophet Ever a Prophet Anymore?

When confronted with statements from General Authorities that contradict an apologetic stance on a given issue, a typical apologetic argument in response is that a “prophet is only a prophet when acting as such” (quoting Joseph Smith). In other words, if the prophetic statement contradicts what the apologist thinks is a more reasonable doctrinal position, then the prophet was “speaking as a man and not as a prophet.” Of course, at some level this doctrine makes sense. Can anyone really expect a prophet to be inspired in all his utterances? Such a notion is rather silly (though some biblical literalists insist upon its application). But the apologists take it to such an extreme as to completely eviscerate the concept of a prophet altogether. Apologists have argued that statements of doctrine, even from the “prophets, seers, and revelators,” are only official doctrine where they: (1) agree with what has been revealed before as found in the standard works; (2) are declared as coming from the Lord; and (3) are presented to the body of the church for a sustaining vote. See Michael R. Ash, "What is Official LDS Doctrine?," (Mesa, Arizona: FAIR, March 2003). Under this very strict definition of doctrine, there are only two prophetic utterances of the last 100 years that constitute “official” doctrine: the revelation extending priesthood ordinations to men of color in 1978 and Joseph F. Smith’s 1918 vision of the spirit world.

To illustrate, what follows are some examples of prophetic statements that at least some apologists have said are not “prophetic” at all (i.e., they are not examples of the prophet revealing the “word of the Lord” but are merely opinions of a man who happens to be a prophet).

        1. A prophet need not say “‘thus saith the Lord’ to give us scripture.” Apostle Apologist

2. The living prophet is more important than the standard works. Apostle Apologist

3. The American Indians are descended from the Lamanites. Apostle Apologist

4. Polynesians are Lamanites. Apostle Apologist

5. The people described in the Book of Mormon occupied all of North, Central, and South America. Apostle Apologist

6. The Hill Cumorah in present-day New York was the site of the two great last battles of the Nephites and the Jaredites. Apostle Apologist

7. A large cache of Nephite records and artifacts are buried in the Hill Cumorah in New York. Apostle Apologist

8. The Book of Abraham was written by Abraham by his own hand upon the papyrus that Joseph Smith translated. Apostle Apologist

9. There was no death before the fall of Adam and Eve. Apostle Apologist

10. The scientific theory of organic evolution is a false doctrine of Satan and one of the Seven Deadly Heresies. Apostle Apologist

 

It seems no Apostolic pronouncement is safe from the Mormon apologists’ re-interpretation, re-characterization, re-definition, and rejection. The Mormon apologists find themselves in quite a pickle: they disagree with the prophets but they know that to be considered faithful Latter-day Saints they must “sustain the Brethren.” Orthodox Mormonism demands an acknowledgment that the prophets and apostles speak for the Lord by revelation. But so many prophetic statements appear to defy basic reason and common sense. So the apologists respond by confining “official doctrine” to an ever-diminishing sphere. Prophetic statements that offend the apologists’ sensibilities are simply not doctrinal. Such statements are denigrated as “personal opinions.” After all, the prophets are mere mortals; they are not perfect or infallible. Of course, with so few prophetic statements actually making the cut as “official doctrine,” the apologists end up agreeing with heretics like me as often as they agree with the prophets and apostles. The difference between the apologists and the heretics, it seems, is that the apologists desire to sustain the men with whom they so often disagree as “prophets” despite the fact that these prophets rarely do more than offer their “personal opinions” on doctrinal matters. The heretics would rather just dispense with the mind games altogether.  If the prophets are really just expressing their own personal opinions, maybe it would be best to dismantle the whole GA Cult of Personality.

 

Comments

[Lunar Quaker]

Excellent post, Equality. One of your best, in my opinion.

Interesting how now we have the apostles starting to take the side of the apologists. Elder Oaks is a prime example. Looks like revelation just isn't sufficient.

[DisaffectedMo]

I enjoyed that article from FAIR about when a prophet is a prophet. Answer: Only when it doesn't contradict something that is obviously true. I really don't understand the mind of a mopologist. Thanks for the post Equality

[Watt Mahoun]

I seriously doubt that the GA cult will weaken. More likely that the Apologists will be taken to the woodshed for some old-fashioned Apostolic whoop-ass.

[Cody Clark]

Excellent post Equality! Thank you. Hit it right on the nose.